Changes

[[File:Blue Marble.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|The historical and scientific evidence strongly indicates that the [[earth]] is approximately 6,000 years old.{{#tag:ref|cf.

[[File:Blue Marble.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|The historical and scientific evidence strongly indicates that the [[earth]] is approximately 6,000 years old.{{#tag:ref|cf.

*Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe<ref name="101Evidences">{{cite web |title=Age of the earth; 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe |author=Don Batten |publisher= CMI |date= 4 June 2009 |url=http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth}}</ref>  

*Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe<ref name="101Evidences">{{cite web |title=Age of the earth; 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe |author=Don Batten |publisher= CMI |date= 4 June 2009 |url=https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth}}</ref>  

*How old is the earth?<ref name="RefutingEvo">{{cite book |title=Refuting Evolution; How old is the earth? |author=Jonathan Sarfati |chapter =8 |url=http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth}}</ref>

*How old is the earth?<ref name="RefutingEvo">{{cite book |title=Refuting Evolution; How old is the earth? |author=Jonathan Sarfati |chapter =8 |url=https://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth}}</ref>

*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A]

*[https://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A]

*[http://creation.com/jesus-age-earth Jesus on the age of the earth]|group=note}}]]

*[https://creation.com/jesus-age-earth Jesus on the age of the earth]|group=note}}]]

{{See also|Counterexamples to an Old Earth}}

{{See also|Counterexamples to an Old Earth}}

The '''Age of the Earth''' has been a matter of interest to humans for millennia. All verifiable evidence indicates that the Earth is about 6,000 years old.  Yet with circular reasoning and implausible assumptions, [[liberals]] insist that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 10⁹ ± 1%).<ref name="101Evidences"/><ref name="RefutingEvo"/><ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml polling]</ref>

The '''Age of the Earth''' has been a matter of interest to humans for millennia. All verifiable evidence indicates that the Earth is about 6,000 years old.  Yet with circular reasoning and implausible assumptions, [[liberals]] insist that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 10⁹ ± 1%).<ref name="101Evidences"/><ref name="RefutingEvo"/><ref>[https://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml polling]</ref>

Old Earth advocates rely on one flawed assumption to the exclusion of other evidence, similar to how an investigator may mistakenly rely on one faulty eyewitness's opinion to the exclusion of all else.  In fact, eyewitness testimony is proven to be less reliable than other indicators, just as the assumption by Old Earth proponents that the [[Radiometric dating|rate of radioactive decay]] has always been constant is flawed. Far from being constant, the rate of radioactive decay would almost certainly slow down as the universe cools.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/nuclear-decay-evidence-for-young-world</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/radioactive-decay-rates-not-stable</ref><ref>https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/the-fallacies-of-radioactive-dating-of-rocks</ref>  At the very least, it is not consistent and easily predictable.<ref>http://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry/Nuclear_Chemistry/Radioactivity/Radioactive_Decay_Rates</ref>

Old Earth advocates rely on one flawed assumption to the exclusion of other evidence, similar to how an investigator may mistakenly rely on one faulty eyewitness's opinion to the exclusion of all else.  In fact, eyewitness testimony is proven to be less reliable than other indicators, just as the assumption by Old Earth proponents that the [[Radiometric dating|rate of radioactive decay]] has always been constant is flawed. Far from being constant, the rate of radioactive decay would almost certainly slow down as the universe cools.<ref>https://www.icr.org/article/nuclear-decay-evidence-for-young-world</ref><ref>https://www.icr.org/article/radioactive-decay-rates-not-stable</ref><ref>https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/the-fallacies-of-radioactive-dating-of-rocks</ref>  At the very least, it is not consistent and easily predictable.<ref>http://chem.libretexts.org/Core/Physical_and_Theoretical_Chemistry/Nuclear_Chemistry/Radioactivity/Radioactive_Decay_Rates</ref>

Moreover, a large number of physical processes, such as neutron capture and fluctuations in solar radiation, affect the rate of radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust and render radioactive dating measurements unreliable, depending upon the specific methods used.<ref>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899536205000138#bib6</ref>

Moreover, a large number of physical processes, such as neutron capture and fluctuations in solar radiation, affect the rate of radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust and render radioactive dating measurements unreliable, depending upon the specific methods used.<ref>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899536205000138#bib6</ref>

Much scientific evidence points to a [[young earth creationism|young age]] of the earth and the universe and the biblical creation organization [[Creation Ministries International]] published articles entitled ''[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]'' and [http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] which summarize some of the evidence for a young age of the earth.  

Much scientific evidence points to a [[young earth creationism|young age]] of the earth and the universe and the biblical creation organization [[Creation Ministries International]] published articles entitled ''[https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]'' and [https://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] which summarize some of the evidence for a young age of the earth.  

== Historical views ==

== Historical views ==

</div>

</div>

|}

|}

Prior to the onset of [[totalitarian]] and [[uniformitarianism|uniformitarian]] (i.e. long-age) [[scientism]] promoted by [[Charles Lyell|Lyell]], [[Darwin]], [[T. H. Huxley|Huxley]], and others in the 19th century, when most people and scientists in [[Europe]] and [[North America]] had a [[Christian]] or [[biblical]] worldview, the [[Atheism|atheist]]ic [[evolution]]ary concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to mainstream [[Western civilization|Western]] [[science]] beyond cursory [[philosophical]] speculations.<ref name="YECBritannica">{{cite web |title=Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher=creation.com |url=http://creation.com/encyclopedia-britannica-supporting-a-young-earth |quote=The concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to science (or to the church[4]) before the rise of uniformitarianism in the 19th century. This is strong evidence that modern long-age views of creation do not originate in Genesis, but are a misguided attempt by some Christian leaders to try to reconcile what God has said with the atheistic pronouncements of evolutionary ‘science’.|accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref>

Prior to the onset of [[totalitarian]] and [[uniformitarianism|uniformitarian]] (i.e. long-age) [[scientism]] promoted by [[Charles Lyell|Lyell]], [[Darwin]], [[T. H. Huxley|Huxley]], and others in the 19th century, when most people and scientists in [[Europe]] and [[North America]] had a [[Christian]] or [[biblical]] worldview, the [[Atheism|atheist]]ic [[evolution]]ary concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to mainstream [[Western civilization|Western]] [[science]] beyond cursory [[philosophical]] speculations.<ref name="YECBritannica">{{cite web |title=Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher=creation.com |url=https://creation.com/encyclopedia-britannica-supporting-a-young-earth |quote=The concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to science (or to the church[4]) before the rise of uniformitarianism in the 19th century. This is strong evidence that modern long-age views of creation do not originate in Genesis, but are a misguided attempt by some Christian leaders to try to reconcile what God has said with the atheistic pronouncements of evolutionary ‘science’.|accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref>

For example, in his 1619 book the ''Harmonices Mundi'' (The Harmony of the World), [[Johannes Kepler]], [[mathematician]] and [[astronomer]] whose [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion|discoveries]] are used in present-day rocket science,<ref>{{cite book |title=Introduction to Rocket Science and Engineering |author=Travis S. Taylor |publisher=CRC Press |year=2017 |isbn=9781498772341 |url=https://books.google.com/books?hl&id=aAagDgAAQBAJ}}</ref> wrote that he does not care if his book will need to wait a century for a reader, as [[God]] has waited '''six thousand years''' for him as an [[Scientific observation|observer]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Harmony of the World |author=Johannes Kepler |publisher=American Philosophical Society |year=1997 |pages=IX, XXXVII, 391, 410 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rEkLAAAAIAAJ&q=six+thousand#v=snippet&q=six%20thousand&f=false|quote=O, Almighty God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee! ... The book is written, to be read either now or by posterity, I care not which. It may be well to wait a century for a reader, as God has waited six thousand years for an observer.}}</ref> Kepler calculated a Creation date of 3992 BC, and [[Isaac Newton]] also strongly defended [[Biblical chronology]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution |author=Jonathan Sarfati |publisher=Creation Books Publishers |year=2010 |place=Atlanta, Georgia, USA |pages=311 |isbn=978-1921-643064 |url=http://creation.com/the-greatest-hoax-on-earth/main.php |quote=Kepler calculated a Creation date of 3992 BC, and Isaac Newton (1643-1727), probably the greatest scientist of all time, also strongly defended biblical chronology.}}</ref><ref name="Newton">{{cite book

For example, in his 1619 book the ''Harmonices Mundi'' (The Harmony of the World), [[Johannes Kepler]], [[mathematician]] and [[astronomer]] whose [[Kepler's laws of planetary motion|discoveries]] are used in present-day rocket science,<ref>{{cite book |title=Introduction to Rocket Science and Engineering |author=Travis S. Taylor |publisher=CRC Press |year=2017 |isbn=9781498772341 |url=https://books.google.com/books?hl&id=aAagDgAAQBAJ}}</ref> wrote that he does not care if his book will need to wait a century for a reader, as [[God]] has waited '''six thousand years''' for him as an [[Scientific observation|observer]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Harmony of the World |author=Johannes Kepler |publisher=American Philosophical Society |year=1997 |pages=IX, XXXVII, 391, 410 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rEkLAAAAIAAJ&q=six+thousand#v=snippet&q=six%20thousand&f=false|quote=O, Almighty God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee! ... The book is written, to be read either now or by posterity, I care not which. It may be well to wait a century for a reader, as God has waited six thousand years for an observer.}}</ref> Kepler calculated a Creation date of 3992 BC, and [[Isaac Newton]] also strongly defended [[Biblical chronology]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Greatest Hoax on Earth? Refuting Dawkins on Evolution |author=Jonathan Sarfati |publisher=Creation Books Publishers |year=2010 |place=Atlanta, Georgia, USA |pages=311 |isbn=978-1921-643064 |url=https://creation.com/the-greatest-hoax-on-earth/main.php |quote=Kepler calculated a Creation date of 3992 BC, and Isaac Newton (1643-1727), probably the greatest scientist of all time, also strongly defended biblical chronology.}}</ref><ref name="Newton">{{cite book

|author= Isaac Newton

|author= Isaac Newton

|title= Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John

|title= Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John

  |author=William W. Hay |publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |year=2012 |pages=63|isbn=9783642285608 |url=http://books.google.no/books?id=teJYlWH9vg4C |quote=Ussher’s was not the first nor last attempt to determine the age of the Earth from the Bible. Estimates had been made by the Venerable Bede in 723 (3952 BC) and John Lightfoot in 1644 (3929), and later by Johannes Kepler (3992 BC), and Isaac Newton (4000 BC) among others.}}</ref> The latter also vigorously opposed to a naturalistic cosmic evolution and suggested [[chemical]] processes that might aid in explaining the creation of the earth's [[crust]] during the '''six days'''.<ref name="Rappaport1997">{{cite book |title=When Geologists Where Historians, 1665-1750 |author=Rhoda Rappaport |publisher=Cornell University Press |place=Ithaca and London |year=1997 |pages=138, 197 |isbn=978-0801-433863 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=30U3W2kI7foC}}</ref> The vast majority of commentators in the past interpreted the days of [[Genesis]] as ordinary days. Furthermore, even those who did not, such as [[Origen]] and [[Augustine]], vigorously attacked long-age ideas and affirmed that the world was only thousands of years.<ref name="FLuke2007"/><br>  

  |author=William W. Hay |publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |year=2012 |pages=63|isbn=9783642285608 |url=http://books.google.no/books?id=teJYlWH9vg4C |quote=Ussher’s was not the first nor last attempt to determine the age of the Earth from the Bible. Estimates had been made by the Venerable Bede in 723 (3952 BC) and John Lightfoot in 1644 (3929), and later by Johannes Kepler (3992 BC), and Isaac Newton (4000 BC) among others.}}</ref> The latter also vigorously opposed to a naturalistic cosmic evolution and suggested [[chemical]] processes that might aid in explaining the creation of the earth's [[crust]] during the '''six days'''.<ref name="Rappaport1997">{{cite book |title=When Geologists Where Historians, 1665-1750 |author=Rhoda Rappaport |publisher=Cornell University Press |place=Ithaca and London |year=1997 |pages=138, 197 |isbn=978-0801-433863 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=30U3W2kI7foC}}</ref> The vast majority of commentators in the past interpreted the days of [[Genesis]] as ordinary days. Furthermore, even those who did not, such as [[Origen]] and [[Augustine]], vigorously attacked long-age ideas and affirmed that the world was only thousands of years.<ref name="FLuke2007"/><br>  

In 1771, the first edition of the [[Encyclopædia Britannica]], the oldest English-language general encyclopedia that was first published as a 3-volume set in [[Scotland]], included a table of world events under the heading ‘[[Astronomy]]’ on page 493. These events begin with the [[creation]] of the world in the year 0, which they dated at 4007 years before Christ.<ref name="YECBritannica"/><ref>{{cite web |title= Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher= creation.com |url=http://creation.com/media-center?fileID=Rj4PFM_od9U |quote= The notion that the world in billions of years old has only been popular for about 200 years. Before that time most scientists understood that Noah's Flood was responsible for laying down the rocks which today are associated with millions of years. Richard Fangrad and Calvin Smith discuss the details. |accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref><br>

In 1771, the first edition of the [[Encyclopædia Britannica]], the oldest English-language general encyclopedia that was first published as a 3-volume set in [[Scotland]], included a table of world events under the heading ‘[[Astronomy]]’ on page 493. These events begin with the [[creation]] of the world in the year 0, which they dated at 4007 years before Christ.<ref name="YECBritannica"/><ref>{{cite web |title= Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher= creation.com |url=https://creation.com/media-center?fileID=Rj4PFM_od9U |quote= The notion that the world in billions of years old has only been popular for about 200 years. Before that time most scientists understood that Noah's Flood was responsible for laying down the rocks which today are associated with millions of years. Richard Fangrad and Calvin Smith discuss the details. |accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref><br>

In 1830, Dr. Hales published a list of 120 historical authorities from various cultures who had decided on an official [[date of creation]].<ref name="Hales">{{cite book |title=Chronology and geography |author=William Hales |publisher=C.J.G. & F. Rivington |year=1830 |page= |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aNfVAAAAMAAJ}}</ref> These ranged from 6984 B.C. to 3616 B.C.<ref>Batten 2002 quotes from "Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Holy Bible", 1879 8th Edition, 1939, which relates this, and reproduces the selection of the dates from Young.</ref>

In 1830, Dr. Hales published a list of 120 historical authorities from various cultures who had decided on an official [[date of creation]].<ref name="Hales">{{cite book |title=Chronology and geography |author=William Hales |publisher=C.J.G. & F. Rivington |year=1830 |page= |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aNfVAAAAMAAJ}}</ref> These ranged from 6984 B.C. to 3616 B.C.<ref>Batten 2002 quotes from "Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Holy Bible", 1879 8th Edition, 1939, which relates this, and reproduces the selection of the dates from Young.</ref>

|-

|-

| style="padding:15px;" | ''“Time is in fact the hero of the plot … given so much time the "impossible" becomes [[Logic of possibility|possible]], the possible probable and the probably virtually certainly certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs [[miracle]]s.”''

| style="padding:15px;" | ''“Time is in fact the hero of the plot … given so much time the "impossible" becomes [[Logic of possibility|possible]], the possible probable and the probably virtually certainly certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs [[miracle]]s.”''

<div style="padding-left:40px;">&mdash; George Wald<ref>{{cite book |title= The Physics and Chemistry of Life|author=George Wald |publisher=G. Bell |year= 1957 |pages=12 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=IlCgnQEACAAJ }}</ref><ref name="West">{{cite web |title=Western culture and the age of the earth; Review of The Dating Game: One Man’s Search for the Age of the Earth by Cherry Lewis, Cambridge University Press, 2000 |author= Tas Walker |publisher= CMI |url= http://creation.com/cherry-lewis-the-dating-game-one-mans-search-for-the-age-of-the-earth-book-review |accessdate=13 June 2015

<div style="padding-left:40px;">&mdash; George Wald<ref>{{cite book |title= The Physics and Chemistry of Life|author=George Wald |publisher=G. Bell |year= 1957 |pages=12 |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=IlCgnQEACAAJ }}</ref><ref name="West">{{cite web |title=Western culture and the age of the earth; Review of The Dating Game: One Man’s Search for the Age of the Earth by Cherry Lewis, Cambridge University Press, 2000 |author= Tas Walker |publisher= CMI |url= https://creation.com/cherry-lewis-the-dating-game-one-mans-search-for-the-age-of-the-earth-book-review |accessdate=13 June 2015

}}</ref>{{#tag:ref|Ad. “time itself performs miracles” - cf. [[Evolution of the gaps]]: An 'explanation' that has no other than philosophical implication and that cannot be tested is regarded for a key symptom of ideological thinking. Moreover, the Slovak poet Ondrej Fabrici maintained that [[idol]]s of the old [[pagan]] belief systems have been refurbished and disguised in the changed setting of the modern era under the new name of scientific endeavor.<ref>{{cite book |title=Prorok Daniel (Prophet Daniel)|author= Jozef Ondrej Markuš|publisher=Matica slovenská|year=2001|page=39|isbn=80-7090-600-6|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zpnkAAAACAAJ|language=Slovak |quote=

}}</ref>{{#tag:ref|Ad. “time itself performs miracles” - cf. [[Evolution of the gaps]]: An 'explanation' that has no other than philosophical implication and that cannot be tested is regarded for a key symptom of ideological thinking. Moreover, the Slovak poet Ondrej Fabrici maintained that [[idol]]s of the old [[pagan]] belief systems have been refurbished and disguised in the changed setting of the modern era under the new name of scientific endeavor.<ref>{{cite book |title=Prorok Daniel (Prophet Daniel)|author= Jozef Ondrej Markuš|publisher=Matica slovenská|year=2001|page=39|isbn=80-7090-600-6|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zpnkAAAACAAJ|language=Slovak |quote=

Či zmenil dačo Chronos starý na plánoch tých Babylonu, hoci sa ako dieťa tvári vek atómu, elektrónu?!  Len tváre figúr vymenené, technika ťahov spresnená, idoly staré postavené  odiali sa v nové mená!  Kulisy zmenil Chronos – čas Babylon žije prostred nás! (Ondrej Fabrici)}}</ref> For example, the “incomprehensibly vast periods of time” invoked by evolutionism is in fact nothing more than refurbished and masqueraded belief in creative power of elapsing time represented either by ancient [[Babylonian]] god, transposed into Greek mythology as [[Chronos]], or antique Aeon,<ref>{{cite web |title= ЭОН |publisher= dic.academic.ru |url= http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_philosophy/3798/ЭОН |language=Russian |accessdate=14 June 2015 |quote= ЭОН (греч. ), термин др.-греч. философии, «жизненный век», «вечность», время в аспекте жизненного существования, как некая целостная самозамкнутая структура (ср. лат. aevum, рус. «век») в отличие от «хро-носа» как абстрактного, количественно-измерительного, объективного и аморфного времени. … В гностицизме зон – это силы, которые исходят от божества. … Эон  в геологии длительный период времени, состоящий из нескольких эр.}}</ref> a divine power constituting a [[gnostic]] belief system.<ref name="Skarsaune">{{cite book

Či zmenil dačo Chronos starý na plánoch tých Babylonu, hoci sa ako dieťa tvári vek atómu, elektrónu?!  Len tváre figúr vymenené, technika ťahov spresnená, idoly staré postavené  odiali sa v nové mená!  Kulisy zmenil Chronos – čas Babylon žije prostred nás! (Ondrej Fabrici)}}</ref> For example, the “incomprehensibly vast periods of time” invoked by evolutionism is in fact nothing more than refurbished and masqueraded belief in creative power of elapsing time represented either by ancient [[Babylonian]] god, transposed into Greek mythology as [[Chronos]], or antique Aeon,<ref>{{cite web |title= ЭОН |publisher= dic.academic.ru |url= http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enc_philosophy/3798/ЭОН |language=Russian |accessdate=14 June 2015 |quote= ЭОН (греч. ), термин др.-греч. философии, «жизненный век», «вечность», время в аспекте жизненного существования, как некая целостная самозамкнутая структура (ср. лат. aevum, рус. «век») в отличие от «хро-носа» как абстрактного, количественно-измерительного, объективного и аморфного времени. … В гностицизме зон – это силы, которые исходят от божества. … Эон  в геологии длительный период времени, состоящий из нескольких эр.}}</ref> a divine power constituting a [[gnostic]] belief system.<ref name="Skarsaune">{{cite book

}}</ref> </div>

}}</ref> </div>

|}

|}

Many scientists liked these values, since they appeared to be consistent with calculations made by [[Hermann von Helmholtz]], who in 1854 estimated the age of sun to be between 20 and 40 million years,<ref name="ingv"/><ref>{{cite web |title= Trial balloons and the age of the earth |author= Tas Walker |publisher=CMI |url= http://creation.com/trial-balloons-geochronology |accessdate= 14 June 2015}}</ref> but for both evolutionists in biology as well as uniformitarians in geology they were distastefully low.<ref name="KelvinRevisited">{{cite web |title= Lord Kelvin revisited on the young age of the earth |author= John Woodmorappe |publisher=CMI |url= http://creation.com/trial-balloons-geochronology |accessdate= 14 June 2015}}</ref> Darwin wrote in his letters that he has ''“not as yet been able to digest the fundamental notion of the shortened age of the sun and earth,”''<ref>{{cite book |author= Loren Eiseley

Many scientists liked these values, since they appeared to be consistent with calculations made by [[Hermann von Helmholtz]], who in 1854 estimated the age of sun to be between 20 and 40 million years,<ref name="ingv"/><ref>{{cite web |title= Trial balloons and the age of the earth |author= Tas Walker |publisher=CMI |url= https://creation.com/trial-balloons-geochronology |accessdate= 14 June 2015}}</ref> but for both evolutionists in biology as well as uniformitarians in geology they were distastefully low.<ref name="KelvinRevisited">{{cite web |title= Lord Kelvin revisited on the young age of the earth |author= John Woodmorappe |publisher=CMI |url= https://creation.com/trial-balloons-geochronology |accessdate= 14 June 2015}}</ref> Darwin wrote in his letters that he has ''“not as yet been able to digest the fundamental notion of the shortened age of the sun and earth,”''<ref>{{cite book |author= Loren Eiseley

|title=Darwin’s Century: Evolution and the Men who Discovered It

|title=Darwin’s Century: Evolution and the Men who Discovered It

|publisher=Anchor

|publisher=Anchor

|pages=234, 235, 240

|pages=234, 235, 240

|isbn= 978-03850-81412

|isbn= 978-03850-81412

|url=http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Century-Evolution-Men-Discovered/dp/0385081413

|url=https://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Century-Evolution-Men-Discovered/dp/0385081413

}}</ref> and admitted that ''“Thompson's views of the recent age of the world”'' have been for some time one of his ''“sorest troubles.”'' (1869).<ref>{{cite web  

}}</ref> and admitted that ''“Thompson's views of the recent age of the world”'' have been for some time one of his ''“sorest troubles.”'' (1869).<ref>{{cite web  

|title= Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., Letter 6706

|title= Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., Letter 6706

In 1943 R.A. Daly of Harvard University published his authoritative paper ''“Meteorites and an Earth model,”'' where he studied the analogies between [[Rock (material)|terrestrial rocks]] and [[meteor]]ites, coupled with deductions on the probable nature of the Earth’s interior. He hypothesized that the latter ones originated by disruption of a planet once situated between Mars and Jupiter, in the region now occupied by [[asteroid]]s. At first textbooks have quoted his theory approvingly, but later it has been disfavored due to mineralogical discontinuities between different groups of meteorites which were interpreted as evidence against a single parent body hypothesis. Nevertheless, the meteorites, “enigmatic bodies,” have managed to attract the great resurgence of interest in scientific research.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Meteorites |author=Brian Mason|journal=American Scientist |volume=55| issue=4 |year=1967|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/27837038?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents}}</ref>  

In 1943 R.A. Daly of Harvard University published his authoritative paper ''“Meteorites and an Earth model,”'' where he studied the analogies between [[Rock (material)|terrestrial rocks]] and [[meteor]]ites, coupled with deductions on the probable nature of the Earth’s interior. He hypothesized that the latter ones originated by disruption of a planet once situated between Mars and Jupiter, in the region now occupied by [[asteroid]]s. At first textbooks have quoted his theory approvingly, but later it has been disfavored due to mineralogical discontinuities between different groups of meteorites which were interpreted as evidence against a single parent body hypothesis. Nevertheless, the meteorites, “enigmatic bodies,” have managed to attract the great resurgence of interest in scientific research.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Meteorites |author=Brian Mason|journal=American Scientist |volume=55| issue=4 |year=1967|url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/27837038?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents}}</ref>  

In his 1956 paper named ''Age of Meteorites and the Earth'', Claire Patterson, using ''“certain assumptions which are apparently justified,”'' introduced for meteor age a figure of '''4.55 ± 0.07 × 10⁹yr.''' and commented that since earth lead meets the requirement for definition of ''“the isotopic evolution of lead for any meteoritic body,”'' it is therefore ''“believed that the age for the earth is the same as for meteorites”'' and that ''"this is the time since the earth attained its present mass"''.<ref>{{cite web |title= Age of meteorites and the earth |author= Claire Patterson |url=http://www.mantleplumes.org/WebDocuments/Patterson1956.pdf |accessdate= }}</ref> In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors, this faith-based figure gradually became a scientific dogma that rarely anyone has dared to question.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Ralph W. Matthews |title=Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth |date=December 1982 |publisher=Creation |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=41–44 |quote=In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors this number has been widely and enthusiastically accepted and is usually quoted as if the evidence was decisive and conclusive. It has assumed something of the status of a universal constant to which all other data must be fitted, thus it has become common practice to assume that data which does not fit this result is either wrong or unintelligible. |accessdate=December 30, 2014}}</ref>  Henry Morris explains that the unprovable assumptions are not the only problem with radiometric dating. One huge concern is that the results published are only a selected sample, chosen especially to agree with preconceived ideas about the earth, life, and [[evolution]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Once upon a time … A Review of The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods by John Woodmorappe |author=Michael J. Oard |url=http://creation.com/once-upon-a-time |accessdate=November 9, 2014}}</ref>

In his 1956 paper named ''Age of Meteorites and the Earth'', Claire Patterson, using ''“certain assumptions which are apparently justified,”'' introduced for meteor age a figure of '''4.55 ± 0.07 × 10⁹yr.''' and commented that since earth lead meets the requirement for definition of ''“the isotopic evolution of lead for any meteoritic body,”'' it is therefore ''“believed that the age for the earth is the same as for meteorites”'' and that ''"this is the time since the earth attained its present mass"''.<ref>{{cite web |title= Age of meteorites and the earth |author= Claire Patterson |url=http://www.mantleplumes.org/WebDocuments/Patterson1956.pdf |accessdate= }}</ref> In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors, this faith-based figure gradually became a scientific dogma that rarely anyone has dared to question.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Ralph W. Matthews |title=Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth |date=December 1982 |publisher=Creation |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=41–44 |quote=In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors this number has been widely and enthusiastically accepted and is usually quoted as if the evidence was decisive and conclusive. It has assumed something of the status of a universal constant to which all other data must be fitted, thus it has become common practice to assume that data which does not fit this result is either wrong or unintelligible. |accessdate=December 30, 2014}}</ref>  Henry Morris explains that the unprovable assumptions are not the only problem with radiometric dating. One huge concern is that the results published are only a selected sample, chosen especially to agree with preconceived ideas about the earth, life, and [[evolution]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Once upon a time … A Review of The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods by John Woodmorappe |author=Michael J. Oard |url=https://creation.com/once-upon-a-time |accessdate=November 9, 2014}}</ref>

When in 1972 N.H. Gale tried to corroborate this established figure, he discovered that U-Pb ages ''"showed apparent large excess of radiogenic lead compared with the amount expected from the decay of Uranium in the meteorites over 4.5AE. ... For each of the 4 meteorites there was an excess of radiogenic lead not supported by uranium decay over 4.5AE.”'' After short analysis:  

When in 1972 N.H. Gale tried to corroborate this established figure, he discovered that U-Pb ages ''"showed apparent large excess of radiogenic lead compared with the amount expected from the decay of Uranium in the meteorites over 4.5AE. ... For each of the 4 meteorites there was an excess of radiogenic lead not supported by uranium decay over 4.5AE.”'' After short analysis:  

== External links ==

== External links ==

*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

*[https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

*[http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-8-how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] - ''Refuting evolution'' - Chapter 8 by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] at [[Creation Ministries International]]

*[https://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-8-how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] - ''Refuting evolution'' - Chapter 8 by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] at [[Creation Ministries International]]

*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa Age of the Earth and Universe] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

*[https://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa Age of the Earth and Universe] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

== Notes ==

== Notes ==