Many creationists argue that the earth is actually very young - maybe only a few thousand years old. Here are some critical views of some of the most common arguments.
Young Earth Creationism, a religious ideology which insists that the Earth is only around 6,000 years old, is not as popular as it once was in America but it also hasn't entirely disappeared, either. In fact, Young Earth Creationists may be among the most vocal and committed creationists because they have bought into biblical literalism completely, even rejecting allegorical readings of Genesis.
Scientists claim that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old - but how do they know this? Read som lines of evidence for this age of the Earth.
An attempted internet debate, with orderly turns between speakers, length limits, and a predetermined topic (the age of the earth).
How did we get from believing that Earth was young to the realization that it is ancient - about 4.5 billion years old?
Creationists argue that the earth's magnetic field proves that the earth cannot be more than 10000 years old. Read the details of this argument and how it is debunked
Determining the ages of ancient ice cores, and thus also the earth. Ice cores from Antarctica date back 160,000 years, which is a real problem for young-earth creationists and catastrophists.
Light from galaxies billions of light years away demonstrate that the universe is ancient, not young. But some young-earth creationists actually argue that the speed of light has changed over time. Does this argument have any validity?
Is radiometric dating invalid? Many young earth creationists think so, but this essay raises questions about their methods.
The standard time scale used by geologists is depicted and described - important for any discussion about the age of the earth when discussing issues with creationists.
The isochron radiometric dating technique does not fall prey to common creationist criticisms of radiometric dating.Learn about what it is, how it is used, and why it is so reliable.
Should both the Earth and Moon be covered with a great layer of space dust if the Earth were as old as the standard models imply? Creationists will argue this, but they base their argument on faulty data and unjustifiable extrapolations.
Young-earth creationist Robert Gentry wants to replace the Big Bang cosmological model of the universe. Find out how his model is flawed with a number of deficiencies, errors and inconsistencies.
A common argument made by young-earth creationists is that the Earth-moon system could not be billions of years old. What are the physics of this system and why these creationists are wrong?
Examination of the claim that creationist Robert Gentry's polonium haloes are evidence for a young earth. Find out why Gentry has misinterpreted the data.
Radiometric dating and stratigraphic principles are combined to establish the conventional geological time scale. Find out how scientists apply such principles to date rocks.
Nuclear fusion is the only process reasonably capable of powering the sun, and one product of this fusion is invisible particles called 'neutrinos'. But why don't we observe as many solar neutrinos as theory would predict?
Can the book of Genesis can be interpreted so that it does not conflict with scientific fact? This article describes a few such attempts.
