A relatively short history for this planet is now a live possibility. Consider this statement from Philosophy Professor Alexander Bird of the University of Bristol:

"... the successful refutation of the young-Earth hypothesis depends on the truth of a theory in physics. But, according to [Karl] Popper’s own epistemology, if one cannot depend on the truth of the auxiliary hypothesis (the theory of radioactive decay) one cannot trust the resulting datum (the age of the rocks) used to refute the hypothesis (that the Earth is young)." [1]

Formerly, Young Earth Theory was discounted, but consider these words from R. F. Diffendal, from his article “Earth in Four Dimensions: Development of the Ideas of Geologic Time and History” in Nebraska History:

"To some extent the arguments about a short Earth history of a few thousand years versus a long history of billions of years are still going on today. Most natural scientists support the long history. However, some people including Richard Milton [Mensan, agnostic, science journalist] … support the idea of a short one." [2]

Consider the recent discovery that the surface of Pluto is young:
Young Earth Science

Also, the New Yorker published an article warning of a likely 9.2 earthquake coming to the Pacific Northwest soon:
The Earthquake That Will Devastate the Pacific Northwest
They predict 100 feet of plate movement in just minutes. This is consistent with Rapid Plate Movements (RPM's) and Young Earth Science (YES). Fox News covered this story:
Report: Mega-quake could kill 13,000 in Pacific Northwest

Some of the best evidences for a young earth include:

• No fossil trees with thousands of rings
• Contradictory radiometric dates
• Solar effects on decay rates
• History only goes back thousands of years
• The human genome is going downhill
• Lack of trillions of Neanderthal graves [3]

The oldest tree in the fossil record only has 816 rings. Other arguments include soft tissue and DNA in fossils supposedly millions of years old. We can’t re-create the Grand Canyon in a laboratory – the scientific evidence supports a rapid formation. Mount St. Helens deposited thick layers and formed a mini Grand Canyon, so it does not take long ages for deep canyons to come about. Furthermore, A Faint Young Sun is a problem for old earth advocates. The solar radiation long ago left the earth too cold for life.

Monitor the news and see how the perspective of most journalists is biased against young earth theory. The public schools have a virtual monopoly and push the idea that the real history of the earth spans billions of years. The educational establishment may persuade students with old earth info, but doubts about in old earth remain strong as a recent AP-GfK poll demonstrates.

Young earth views are widespread. A 2007 poll of 1600 Russians found that 30% agree with the statement, “[The] first human beings were living in the same era as dinosaurs.” A 2005 survey of residents of the European Union had 29% agreeing with man-dinosaur coexistence! Are there dinosaurs in the modern world?

According to Scientific American, the “Young Earth May Have Been All Wet.” Actually, the omnicultural approach teaches us that a global catastrophe occurred just thousands of years ago based on traditions from around the globe. If catastrophism is the leading paradigm in earth history, then a young earth makes sense. Stokes and Judson state in their Geology text Introduction to Geology (Prentice-Hall) that,

"A catastrophist might contend that the twisting and breaking of strata, the transportation of huge blocks of rock, the violent cutting of canyons, and the wholesale destruction of life is within the power of a great universal flood - and he would be right." [4]

In recent times, the progressive attitude has been open to a global cataclysm. Consider Roland Emmerich’s disaster film 2012 which was based on Charles Hapgood’s pole shift theory which Einstein praised. A Japanese disaster film actually depicts the catastrophic shifting of tectonic plates which dooms Japan - Japan Sinks (2006, Nihon Chinbotsu). This is science fiction, but it is based on real science (as illustrated above from the film).

To uncritically accept an old earth is a literal mistake. The conflict between young earth theory and old-earthism clearly has implications for evolution and Darwinism.

Notes:
1) “The epistemology of science—a bird’s-eye view” by Alexander Bird, Synthese, Aug. 2010, Vol. 175, Issue 1 Supplement, pp 5-16, p. 7.
Knowledge, Rationality & Action [95], Emphasis added.
2) quoted in Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (Ideas, Big Spring, TX, 2014), p. 190.
3) documented in the book in note 2) above.
4) quoted in Hall, p. 97.