Changes

[[File:Moon2.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|"Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity ([[Roche limit]]) at less than a quarter of their supposed age."<ref name="Age of the earth">[https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref> see: [https://creation.com/the-moon-the-light-that-rules-the-night Recession of the moon from the earth] ]]

[[File:Moon2.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|"Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity ([[Roche limit]]) at less than a quarter of their supposed age."<ref name="Age of the earth">[https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref> see: [https://creation.com/the-moon-the-light-that-rules-the-night Recession of the moon from the earth] ]]

It takes only one counterexample to disprove the theory of an [[Old Earth]]. Most of the "evidence" for an Old Earth is based on claims that lack [[falsifiability]], such as [[radiometric dating]], and hence would not even satisfy minimum requirements for admissibility in a court of law. If each of the following 70 '''''counterexamples''''' to an Old Earth were to have merely a 10% chance of being valid, then the probability that the Earth is billions of years old is less than one-tenth of 1%. In other words, '''''the Earth must be young with a likelihood of more than 99.9%'''''.<ref>This same type of analysis could be applied to the [[Young Earth]] theory, but no valid counterexamples have been found in centuries of atheist attempts. There are over 100 proofs of a young [[earth]] and [[universe]] (See [https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth ''Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe'']).</ref>

It takes only one counterexample to disprove the [[Old Earth]] theory. Most of the "evidence" for an Old Earth is based on claims that lack [[falsifiability]], such as [[radiometric dating]], which fails requirements for admissibility in a court of law. If each of the following '''''70 counterexamples''''' to an Old Earth has merely a 10% chance of being valid, then the probability that the Earth is billions of years old is less than one-tenth of 1%. In other words, '''''it is 99.9% likely that the Earth is young'''''.<ref>This same type of analysis could be applied to the [[Young Earth]] theory, but no valid counterexamples have been found in centuries of atheist attempts. There are over 100 proofs of a young [[earth]] and [[universe]] (See [https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth ''Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe'']).</ref>

Much additional scientific evidence points to a [[Young earth creationism|young]] [[Age of the Earth|age of the earth]] and the universe, and [[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 evidence for a young age of the earth. Further arguments can be found in the article [[arguments for a recent creation]].

Much additional scientific evidence points to a [[Young earth creationism|young]] [[Age of the Earth|age of the earth]] and the universe, and [[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 evidence for a young age of the earth. Further arguments can be found in the article [[arguments for a recent creation]].

=== History ===

=== History ===

[[File:Sphinx pyramid.jpg|thumb|200px|Although frequently cited by Old Earth supporters against a young Earth, [[New Chronology|revised and well-supported Egyptian chronology]] actually provides strong evidence in favor of a young Earth.]]

[[File:Sphinx pyramid.jpg|thumb|200px|Although frequently cited by Old Earth supporters against a young Earth, [[New Chronology|revised and well-supported Egyptian chronology]] actually provides strong evidence in favor of a young Earth.]]

# The oldest direct evidence of life—written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc.—is no older than about 3,000 B.C.<ref>"The sword did in fact look very similar to those found in the Royal Palace of Arslantepe (Eastern Anatolia), dating back to five thousand years ago and considered to be the oldest swords in the world." [https://www.unive.it/pag/16584/?tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=8707&cHash=8aefaf0abbc21b8f74850ae791b09ad7]</ref> and certainly younger than 4,000 B.C., the approximate date of origin of the Earth, based on a straightforward reading of the [[Bible]]. While adherents to a belief in an old Earth claim of artifacts existing further back than 4,000 B.C., those people come to their conclusions due to their presuppositions (i.e. the lens through which they see the world) that evolution is true, that the Earth is old, and that humans were originally dumb and became more intelligent as time went on.<ref>Mortenson, Terry (July 7, 2015). [https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/trillions-of-artifacts/ Trillions of “Artifacts”—Who’s Really Got the Problem?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 13, 2017.</ref><ref>Climer, Phillip (May 23, 2012). [https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/archaeology-and-the-bible/ Archaeology and the Bible]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 13, 2017.</ref>

# The oldest direct evidence of life—written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc.—is no older than about 3,000 B.C.<ref>"The sword did in fact look very similar to those found in the Royal Palace of Arslantepe (Eastern Anatolia), dating back to five thousand years ago and considered to be the oldest swords in the world." [https://www.unive.it/pag/16584/?tx_news_pi1%5Bnews%5D=8707&cHash=8aefaf0abbc21b8f74850ae791b09ad7]</ref> and certainly younger than 4,000 B.C., the approximate date of origin of the Earth, based on a straightforward reading of the [[Bible]]. While adherents to a belief in an old Earth assert artifacts exist further back than 4,000 B.C., those people come to their conclusions due to their presuppositions (i.e. the lens through which they see the world) that evolution is true, that the Earth is old, and that humans were originally dumb and became more intelligent as time went on.<ref>Mortenson, Terry (July 7, 2015). [https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/trillions-of-artifacts/ Trillions of “Artifacts”—Who’s Really Got the Problem?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 13, 2017.</ref><ref>Climer, Phillip (May 23, 2012). [https://answersingenesis.org/archaeology/archaeology-and-the-bible/ Archaeology and the Bible]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved April 13, 2017.</ref>

# Over 270 cultures have flood legends that distinctly resemble the biblical flood account.<ref>[https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/legends-of-the-flood/ Legends of the Flood]. ''Answers in Genesis''. January 30, 2014. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref><ref>White, Monty (March 29, 2007). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/flood-legends/ Flood Legends]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref> While critics like to say the biblical flood account is descended from other stories, in reality, it is the other way around, as the biblical flood account is far superior to any flood legend in multiple ways.<ref>Lacey, Troy & Anderson jr, Lee (October 1, 2013). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/the-genesis-flood-not-just-another-legend/ The Genesis Flood—Not Just Another Legend]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref> Creation legends also exist, but once again, the biblical account is superior.<ref name="AncientMyths">Ham, Steve (March 29, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-myths/is-genesis-111-a-derivation-from-ancient-myths/ Is Genesis 1–11 a Derivation from Ancient Myths?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref>

# Over 270 cultures have flood legends that distinctly resemble the biblical flood account.<ref>[https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/legends-of-the-flood/ Legends of the Flood]. ''Answers in Genesis''. January 30, 2014. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref><ref>White, Monty (March 29, 2007). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/flood-legends/ Flood Legends]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref> While critics like to say the biblical flood account is descended from other stories, in reality, it is the other way around, as the biblical flood account is far superior to any flood legend in multiple ways.<ref>Lacey, Troy & Anderson jr, Lee (October 1, 2013). [https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/the-genesis-flood-not-just-another-legend/ The Genesis Flood—Not Just Another Legend]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref> Creation legends also exist, but once again, the biblical account is superior.<ref name="AncientMyths">Ham, Steve (March 29, 2011). [https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/creation-myths/is-genesis-111-a-derivation-from-ancient-myths/ Is Genesis 1–11 a Derivation from Ancient Myths?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref>

# Noah, his sons, and his further descendants mentioned in the Bible are found and named in numerous cultures and there is much extra-biblical evidence for their existence, showing that they were real people who made a real impact.<ref name="Dispersion">Hodge, Bodie (August 19, 2010). [https://answersingenesis.org/tower-of-babel/was-the-dispersion-at-babel-a-real-event/ Chapter 28 - Was the Dispersion at Babel a Real Event?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref>  There are royal genealogies in Europe that trace their family lines back to Noah.<ref name="Dispersion"/>

# Noah, his sons, and his further descendants mentioned in the Bible are found and named in numerous cultures and there is much extra-biblical evidence for their existence, showing that they were real people who made a real impact.<ref name="Dispersion">Hodge, Bodie (August 19, 2010). [https://answersingenesis.org/tower-of-babel/was-the-dispersion-at-babel-a-real-event/ Chapter 28 - Was the Dispersion at Babel a Real Event?]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved August 18, 2016.</ref>  There are royal genealogies in Europe that trace their family lines back to Noah.<ref name="Dispersion"/>