The Genesis account of creation stands literally for 24 hour time periods

I'd like to first thank you for your permission. And, as you may expect, I did go and read the time starlight article. Ill bring that up first as that's what came to mind first. "Since God created the stars on Day 4, their light would leave the star on Day 4 and reach earth on Day 4 cosmic local time. Light from all galaxies would reach earth on Day 4 if we measure it according to cosmic local time. Someone might object that the light itself would experience billions of years (as the passenger on the plane experiences the two hour trip). However, according to Einstein's relativity, light does not experience the passage of time, so the trip would be instantaneous. Now, this idea may or may not be the reason that distant starlight is able to reach earth within the biblical timescale, but so far no one has been able to prove that the Bible does not use cosmic local time. So, it is an intriguing possibility." (1) This point here starts to break down the differences between young and old. From some point of relativity, a stationary one, billions of years have passed, while from the relative point of view from the light, no or little time has passed. I guess that we need to determine from where we are determining the time that has passed. As young earth, the earth is the point of relativity since you accept that the earth and universe are only 10000 years old. I'm happy you didn't say that light could have gone faster as hat would have many implications due to Einstein's E=MC^2. I guess we are almost out of space, but I'm curious as to where your frame of reference is in Genesis, on Earth (as I initially assumed) or outside (bordering day-age). This leads into my counter for the first point. Where is the day evening and morning occurring? Repeating myself, the sun didn't exist at this point. So you can base the day off other evens that occur at a similar rate as the earths rotation, or as I propose, a reference point outside of the world. I will accept your counter on Carbon dating. As for Geological records, I will try to better explain them and the conclusion. I will use two points, Potassium- Argon dating (K-Ar) and sedimentary deposits. Potassium(K) has a radioactive form, K40, which has a half life of 1.248"10^9 years(2). This decays into Argon(Ar) 40. This method is preformed on igneous rock that has next to no gases within. This is an assumption that you will likely target. The quantity of Ar40 found within the sample that is due to the environment would be proportional to the Ar36 found in the sample. Ar36 is not the product of radioactive decay within igneous rock. Now a quantity of Ar40 will be determined that is due to the radioactive decay of K40. You can then determine the portion of the K40 to Ar40, and an approximate age can be determined. The math is more complicated, but ages over 1 million years can be determined. Fossils found between two layers can be assumed to have been alive between these two dates. Second, the sediment levels. This is much harder to explain and can be excused simply by a global flood, but I will try here too. So over time sediments are deposited by water. This eventually gets compressed, and layers are notable. These layers would be counter intuitive for a flood where all the plants and animals would appear in one level, and one large layer would be prominent. This is probably not sufficient of an explanation, and you can avoid it because it leads more into the extent of the flood, which I am not prepared to look into at this time. Conclusion I doubt we will have a true conclusion. I will be incapable of producing enough strong evidence, while you may be incapable of refuting every objection. That's the way it is, but I enjoy the discussion. 1http://www.answersingenesis.org... 2 http://en.wikipedia.org...