the earth is slowing by about 0.005 seconds per year..that is not near enough to prove any kind of 10,000 year old earth..thats enough to have the earth's day be less than 23 hours long 370 million years ago..a study by john wells of cornell university in 1963 on rugose corals from the devonian age(370 mya) shows a year of 400 days--each about 22 hours long

(2) Thermal energy within the earth has been decaying through the process of conduction to the surface of the earth and radiation out into space from the surface of the earth.

that would be the earths natural heat, like molten and stuff(the layer below the crust?)

(3) Magnetic energy associated with the earth's dipole magnet has been decaying, causing a growing diminution of the magnetic field that shields the earth from cosmic and solar radiation hazards.

the earth's magnetic field(a favorite argument of young-earthers) is known to have fluctuated throughout the past..the magnetic field might be decaying now, but it hasn't always been decaying..it has built up in the past, and it has decayed

The measured decay rates associated with each of these decay processes, together with reasonable constraints on their initial state, enable physicists to find limits to the possible age of the earth. Kelvin used the first two decay processes to establish limits of: (1) less than a billion years; (2) less than 24 million years; respectively, on the earth's age. Of course the shorter limit is the controlling one and Kelvin held to less than 24 million years for the earth's age.

how long ago did kelvin live?..1800s?..science has advanced greatly since kelvin lived

More recently, the author has taken some clues from theoretical work by Sir Horace Lamb, some extensive observational data, assumed a reasonable constraint on the upper limit of the earth's magnetic field, and the laws of electromagnetism to arrive at an age of the earth's magnet of less than 10,000 years.

but the decay of the magnetic field varies..it is not consistent

He showed that, if the earth had been here for 7.2 billion years, its initial rate of rotation would have been twice its present rate (the days being only 12 hours long).

quick quiz:how old do scientists currently believe the earth to be?..(answer below)

Kelvin noted that, even if the earth had been molten and consolidated at some time appreciably less than a billion years ago, it would still have evidences of that centrifugal effect and its continents would run east and west around the equator rather than the present configuration of continents running more or less north and south.

irrelevant..continents haven't been in their present formation for long(compared to the billions of years the earth has been in existance)..kelvin lived before plate tectonics and the stuff was started(or widely accepted)

Today there is evidence that the earth's rate of rotation is slowing even more than the value used by Kelvin.

kelvin thought it was slowing by less than 0.005 seconds per year?

Nevertheless the actual configurations of the continents and seas refute "historical geology's" claim of a 4.6 billion year age for the earth.

no it doesn't..it could be relevant if the continents were all thought to stay stationary, but as we know, they don't..they move

Some scientists claimed that radioactivity in the earth would alter this limit upward, but none has given any clear analysis of how much it would alter Kelvin's value. Kelvin was well aware of radioactivity, as is demonstrated by the fact that he wrote several papers on it. That did not appear to him to alter the problem at all. He was working from an actual measured thermal flux gradient and a knowledge of thermal conductivity of the crustal rocks and was still confident that he had shown that the earth's age does not exceed 24 million years.

kelvin claimed the earth was that young before radioactivity was discovered

Even so, this magnet was much stronger in the ages past.

and weaker, too..the dipole component of the magnetic field is expected to reverse in a few thousand years..(the nondipole component is increasing, canceling out what the dipole is doing)

The decay rate of this magnet is the most remarkable worldwide geophysical decay phenomenon ever measured. The author has employed the fundamental laws of electromagnetism (Maxwell's Equation), together with a reasonable assumption about the initial state of the earth's magnet and the measured decay rate of the earth's magnetic moment, to derive a limit on the age of the earth's magnet.

the decay rate(for the last 150 years) was done exponentially, not in a straight line..why?..because the man who did it (thomas barnes) was a biblical literalist and making the decay a straight line wouldnt have done the trick for him..the magnetic field's size is known for millions of years

This is a serious problem to evolutionary geologists.

no, it is not because the argument is made based on false conclusions

None of them seems willing to admit that the earth's magnetic energy is dying out, but the data and physics unequivocally show that it is dying out.

it shows that the earth's magnetic field is decaying, but not that it will continue to do so, nor that it has been since earth formed

A publication of the Department of Commerce itemizes the values of the earth's magnetic moment for the last 130 years and states that, if the decrease in the earth's magnetic moment persists, their analysis shows "that the dipole moment will vanish in A.D. 3991."

the nondipole part of the magnetic field would not vanish(as i mentioned earlier)..as i also mentioned earlier, the field is expected to reverse sometime in the next few thousand years

The irony of this whole problem is that its solution is a simple one when one accepts the actual physics and sees that it does imply a young earth.

too bad its not a steady-state

quick quiz answer:4.5 billion years old

complete version of impact #16

email me