[Nathan Zachary]

"The earth is 4 billion years old. Lots of time for changes."

It can't be. The moon wouldn't be where it is today if it was, and that fact alone throws every evolution theory on it's arse. Which is why it's never mentioned in any evo theories.

[Coyoteman]

The moon wouldn't be where it is today if it was, and that fact alone throws every evolution theory on it's arse. Which is why it's never mentioned in any evo theories.

Response (from Index to Creationist Claims, Claim CE110):

1. The moon is receding at about 3.8 cm per year. Since the moon is 3.85 x 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.

(See original for references.)

Looks like you're wrong again!