There is an abundance of scientific evidence supporting the young earth theory. Most biologists have long claimed that the earth is 4.5 billion years old; however, many astronomers and geologists had accepted the fact that this "theory" was a scientific impossibility decades ago.
Since the first man decided to reject that the world was created by God, there have been theories about why the world exists. The most widely accepted secular theory is the "Big Bang" Theory. The short version of this theory is that all matter was compacted into a speck the size of this period. This matter compacted until it exploded from the pressure. As the matter flew outward, it expanded.
In theory, it will keep moving outward until the force of the blast subsides. Then, it is expected to crash back together and repeat the process again. The biggest problem with this theory is that similar to evolution's problem of explaining how the components for the first cell appeared, there is still no explanation for the appearance of matter and energy.
Geologically there are many evidences that the Earth was formed rapidly. I will mention only a few of them- Dr. Robert Gentry?s work with polonium 210 and 218 proved that the Earth never went through a long cooling period. In order for the polonium rings to be trapped in the granite, the granite would have to be instantaneously formed in a cool state.
In Dr. J.D. Morris?s book "The Young Earth", Morris gives evidence that all of the continents should have completely eroded in 14 million years. Many geologists have also been puzzled by the lack of erosion between sedimentary layers. If the layers had been put down with millions of years, between layers there would be erosion between each layer. Lack of erosion proves the layers were put down quickly. There is also another interesting missing layer. That is dirt. Soil layers are rare and their absence contradicts the assumption that the geologic columns were distributed slowly over time.
Finally, I should mention Polystrate formations, fossils that are found across more than one layer. These layers would had to have been laid down millions of years apart for the Earth to be billions of years old.
Astronomically there are even more complex evidences that the universe is young. One problem is addressed in many books. Two of these are ?Comets and the Age of the Solar System? By Danny Faulkner PhD and ?The Short Period Comet Problem? by Robert Newton. When comets approach the Sun they lose part of their material. Comets with shorter orbits that reappear close to the sun in 200 years or less would have dissipated in 10,000 years at the most.
However, there is still large numbers of these comets around. Astronomers have looked for a source for new comets to explain why there are so many comets now. None of the theories have worked out, leaving the age of these comets at less then 10,000 years. According to the ?Big Bang? Theory, comets would have to be as old as the rest of the universe. The Earth?s moon is another contradiction. The most widely known issue is moon dust. There should be around 375 feet instead of mere inches.
In addition, there are high concentrations of Uranium-236 and Thorius-230 on the moon, which should have decayed billions of years ago. Another problem is the sun, which shrinks at a steady rate of a few feet per year. You can?t go much farther then 15,000 years in the reverse without the sun causing such environmental heat to the earth to prevent all life. Dr. Russell Akridge and Dr. Danny Faulkner have published work about the age of the sun.
A few more considerations, due to Venus?s climate, its surface would be completely eroded by now. Because of tectonic activity on Jupiter?s moon, Lo should not be active at the date if the universe is billions of years old. H.S. Slusher claims there should be only a few spiral galaxies left however, a huge number exist. ?Saturn?s Rings- Short lived and young? by Andrew A Snelling agree with ?How old are Saturn?s rings? by David M. Harris, where each claims that Saturn?s rings are unstable and should not last very long after formation.
Russell Humphreys PhD, Thomas G. Barnes, and NASA APOD are just a few scientists that have concerns with the Earth?s magnetic field. It is in a steady rate of decay. When you take that rate back anymore then 10,000 years you achieve a field that is intolerantly powerful to life. And finally, the magnetic fields of the planets Mercury, Neptune, Uranus and Jupiter?s moon Ganymede should have decayed out of existence.
I would like to mention that length does not permit me to go into fossil records that prove agriculture was discovered 5,000 to 6,000 years ago and that our fuels are similarly that age and less. There are many scientists who believe based on strong scientific evidence that this earth is young. Unfortunately, many have run into the politics surrounding evolution.
If the earth is young, that leaves evolution without an evolutionary branch to stand on. My conclusion: It?s a young world after all.
