Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Why do people go silly when talking about evidence for a young earth?

People start to spout nonsense.

moon is receding from the earth at about an inch each year. This puts an upper limit on the earth/moon system far less than 4.5 billion years.

This is a fact - the recession of the moon is measurable.

We can do the math and it puts an upper limit on the age of the moon and earth.

http://creation.com/the-moons-recession-and-age

Curious that people will claim that black is white when you challenge their dearly held religious beliefs about cosmic evolution.

12 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    People believe what the evolutionist establishment tells them without seriously questioning it. It is just like the story of the Emperor's New Clothes. And we all know how the evolutionist establishment operates, they pick and choose the evidence that suits them and ignore the evidence that doesn't.

    If evolution is just a scientific theory like any other, why has it become sacrosanct? Why must it not be questioned? The dogmatic attitude of evolutionist zealots tells its own story, and it is certainly not what one would expect from 'objective' scientists.

  • 1 decade ago

    According to the link to "creation.com" that you provided, the recession of the moon means that the moon and earth are at least 1.5 billion years old. Whether or not they're underestimating it by about 300%, that's still just a TAD more than the 6500 years that the young earth geniuses would have each other believe, isn't it? Why yes, it is.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    double planet system, that is actually what Earth/Moon are have periodic oscillations in their distance from each other. What you forgot to mention, Moon was MUCH closer to Earth than it is now, and thus the 1 inch you mentioned would certainly not invalidate the 4,55 billion years age of Earth.

    You also conveniently do not mention radioactive decay in dating the age of Earth, why ? yes Earth, is about 4.55 Billion years old, if you like it or not. The link you give is a joke.

  • 1 decade ago

    Religious indoctrination renders the Young Earth Creationist incapable of recognizing any honesty or making rational arguments.

    It makes the brain so receptive to lies that they will state something like this, so authoritatively, when some simple calculations would have shown them how dishonest it was. This shows how little merit there is in the faith of Young Earth Creationists.

    225,622 x 5,280 x 12 = 14,295,409,920

    14,295,409,920 > 4,500,000,000

    Fake science with arbitrary constants and exponents doesn't change reality. It just shows how desperate this dying religion of pseudo-Christian, Genesis-worshiping idolaters is.

  • 1 decade ago

    Clearly you lack the ability to distinguish between what something SEEMS TO BE and what something IS. Do not ignore evidence of an older Earth simply because you disagree with it. This does not make your argument more valid.

  • 1 decade ago

    1. The moon is receding at about 3.8 cm per year. Since the moon is 3.85 × 1010 cm from the earth, this is already consistent, within an order of magnitude, with an earth-moon system billions of years old.

    2. The magnitude of tidal friction depends on the arrangement of the continents. In the past, the continents were arranged such that tidal friction, and thus the rates of earth's slowing and the moon's recession, would have been less. The earth's rotation has slowed at a rate of two seconds every 100,000 years (Eicher 1976).

    3. The rate of earth's rotation in the distant past can be measured. Corals produce skeletons with both daily layers and yearly patterns, so we can count the number of days per year when the coral grew. Measurements of fossil corals from 180 to 400 million years ago show year lengths from 381 to 410 days, with older corals showing more days per year (Eicher 1976; Scrutton 1970; Wells 1963; 1970). Similarly, days per year can also be computed from growth patterns in mollusks (Pannella 1976; Scrutton 1978) and stromatolites (Mohr 1975; Pannella et al. 1968) and from sediment deposition patterns (Williams 1997). All such measurements are consistent with a gradual rate of earth's slowing for the last 650 million years.

    4. The clocks based on the slowing of earth's rotation described above provide an independent method of dating geological layers over most of the fossil record. The data is inconsistent with a young earth.

    Source(s): Links: Thompson, Tim, 2000. The recession of the Moon and the age of the Earth-Moon system. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html Matson, Dave E., 1994. How good are those young-earth arguments? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/howgood-yea... References: 1. Eicher, D. L., 1976. Geologic Time. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. 2. Mohr, R. E., 1975. Measured periodicities of the Biwabik (Precambrian) stromatolites and their geophysical significance. In: Rosenberg and Runcorn, pp. 43-56. 3. Pannella, G., 1976. Tidal growth patterns in Recent and fossil mollusc bivalve shells: A tool for the reconstruction of paleotides. Naturwissenschaften 63: 539-543. 4. Pannella, G., C. MacClintock and M. Thompson, 1968. Paleontological evidence of variation in length of synodic month since Late Cambrian. Science 162: 792-796. 5. Rosenberg, G. D. and S. K. Runcorn (eds.), 1975. Growth Rhythms and the History of the Earth's Rotation. New York: Wiley. 6. Scrutton, C. T., 1970. Evidence for a monthly periodicity in the growth of some corals. In: Palaeogeophysics, S. K. Runcorn, ed., London: Academic Press, pp. 11-16. 7. Scrutton, C. T., 1978. Periodic growth features in fossil organisms and the length of the day and month. In: Tidal Friction and the Earth's Rotation. P. Brosche and J. Sundermann, eds., Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 154-196. 8. Wells, J. W., 1963. Coral growth and geochronometry. Nature 197: 948-950. 9. Wells, J. W., 1970. Problems of annual and daily growth-rings in corals. In: Palaeogeophysics, S. K. Runcorn, ed., London: Academic Press, pp. 3-9. 10. Williams, G. E., 1997. Precambrian length of day and the validity of tidal rhythmite paleotidal values. Geophysical Research Letters 24(4): 421-424. Further Reading: Pannella, G., 1972. Paleontological evidence on the Earth's rotational history since the early Precambrian. Astrophysics and Space Science 16: 212-237. (technical) Rosenberg, G. D. and S. K. Runcorn (eds.), 1975. Growth Rhythms and the History of the Earth's Rotation. New York: Wiley. (technical) Schopf, J. William (ed.), 1983. Earth's Earliest Biosphere. Its Origin and Evolution. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. (technical) --- ALL CREATIONIST ARGUMENTS ARE DISHONEST. When you repeat one without realizing it, you associate your religion with ignorance, arrogance, and dishonesty. Do you really want to keep doing that?
  • 1 decade ago

    "beliefs about cosmic evolution."

    Last time I checked, evolution explained the diversity of life on Earth, NOT how far the moon is from our planet.

  • 1 decade ago

    Couldn't find this on a non-biased site, huh.

  • 1 decade ago

    But, who has a tape measure long enough to measure it?

  • Why you ask same question? You already shouted down by reason and facts a few minutes ago.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.