The assumption of those who do not believe in a young earth is that observable processes of change (radiometric decay, the expansion of the universe) have been going on in the same way since they began.
Now I'll admit that is an assumption, but it is an assumption that is challenged by no observable data whatsoever. For one among scores of possible examples, there is no known case of argon-40 reconstituting itself into potassium-40.
Those who believe in a young earth can counter this by:
- Asserting that every single one of these process measurements is a lie, deliberately propounded by a scientific establishment which has maintained the lies over two centuries in a deliberate attempt to destroy Christianity, or
- Asserting that God deliberately created the universe with countless evidences of great age as a test of faith, intending that believers discard it all and replace it with the genealogical tables of the Old Testament.
I find neither of those assertions necessary to my belief.
Me neither.
How long did it take Jesus to turn water into fine vintage wine?
“Were you there?”
Yes he was, xzins told me. In fact, I have it on good authority that PM suggested that Eve might be a good playmate, ah, helpmate, for Adam, so we can blame him for all that originates from that suggestion.