I openly confess that I am not a scientist and am not claiming to be an expert in scientific matters. The truth is that most, if not all of us here probably cannot claim expertise, or are recognized authority. Yet all of us draw conclusions about life based upon what we do and what we can know and observe.
Creation scientists are divided in their understandings of the geologic age of the earth. Some believe in vast geologic ages of the earth and look at creation as the start of life on an old formless planet. There is some room for Biblical interpretation on this in Genesis 1 where it talks of the earth being without form and void, darkness over all, and the presence of waters before God started the creation of life and the brought the earth as we know it into formation by separating it from the water. These scientists still do not believe that biologic life evolved or existed prior to the 6 day creation.
Other Creation Scientists believe they can explain everything within the context of a 6 day model for the simultaneous creation (from nothing) of the geologic earth and biologic life.
I will not commit one way or the other on the potential geologic age of the planet before its creation as "earth" in the 6 day creation. I do believe that Genesis is very clear on the simultaneous creation of the earth (creation of form and separation from the waters) and life as we know it, and that it was created with mature age in 6 literal days.
The problem with evolution has always been in establishing a scientific model which begins its origins. It is interesting to note how evolutionists on this thread have tried to divorce themselves from this dilemma and separate it from evolution, when the founder of evolutionary thought called his most notable book--"The origin of the species." There is no way that evolutionists can demonstrate spontaneous beginnings of biologic life. Until they do so they do not even have a credible case, only wishful thinking. Life always begets life. Evolution also needs transitional life forms to prove its theory, because at some point, no matter how far back you push the issue, a macro evolution is required.
The geologic age of the earth can be argued in various ways but still it needs an uncaused first cause of creation.
Evolution still only remains an unproven theory that violates the basic laws of science--that creation is required by an uncaused first cause, the necessity for intelligent design, and life begetting life.
