Is it surprising that science supports a young earth?

Answer 1

It would be very surprising if science supports a young earth, but if science really did support this I would advocate acceptance of the evidence. However, the scientific evidence is that the world is approximately 4.54 billion years old. That is young compared to the age of the universe, but old compared to some religious views.

There are, of course, those who would like science to support a young earth. Phillip E. Johnson, was a professor of law, and therefore unlikely to have had a strong understanding of the Earth Sciences, but his strong religious beliefs caused him to found the 'intelligent design' movement that makes claims in support of a young earth.

For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation

Answer 2

It is unacceptable to those who do not wish to accept it. Evidence for a young age of the Earth is not publicized. "Most professors continue to teach evolution in the universities, out of fear," explains Dr. Phillip E. Johnson, retired professor of law at the University of California Berkeley. "This fear is that of not being tenured, of not getting research grants, of not being published, and of not being accepted by their peers. They must follow the party line, which is evolution. This is how the academic game is played."

See also:

What_are_some_proofs_offered_by_Creationists

http://judaism.answers.com/jewish-philosophy/can-you-prove-that-god-exists

http://www.allaboutscience.org/intelligent-design.htm

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/sci-ev/sci_vs_ev_26.htm

Answer 3

No, it is actually surprising that science supports a young earth. The overwhelming consensus among scientists is that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, based on multiple lines of evidence such as radiometric dating of rocks, the study of fossils, and the understanding of geological processes.