Age of the earth measured? With what?
Please see post #45 in this thread. In the article linked to, your question is answered in great detail by an evangelical Christian scientist and scholar.
Your dismissal of modern research by people who take God at his word is insulting. I've read Dr Walt Brown's take on Genesis. I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but that could easily be because of my inability to understand.
I do not dismiss old or modern research that has been conducted by scholars who have been internationally recognized for their contribution to their field. By researching creationist Walter T. Brown, I have learned that he has not earned any graduate degrees in any field of science and that his B.S. degree is in an area of study that is of no relevance to the book of Genesis or any of his published writings. I have also learned that Walter Brown does not know so much as the Hebrew alphabet, and that he relies upon substandard translations of the Bible.
Twisting Genesis in order to fit the world's ideas is foolish and unnecessary. When God's word and the world disagree, I'll stand on God's word every time. It's never let me down and never will.
Prayerfully and accurately translating the Word of God does not twist it; it makes it accessible to readers who cannot read the Bible in the languages in which God chose to give it to us. That the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ is most accurately translated “dome” is supported by
all of the relevant linguistic and cultural data, and there is
no data supporting the notion that the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ can be accurately translated as “atmosphere.” The evidence for the correctness of this translation is found in the use of this word in ancient Hebrew literature. Based upon this usage,
the Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament by Brown, Driver, and Briggs published by Oxford University (the standard Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament used in Christian colleges, seminaries, and universities) gives us the following meaning of it in Gen. 1:6, 7, and 8, “the vault of heaven, or ‘firmament,’ regarded by Hebrews as solid, and supporting ‘waters’ above it.” (p. 956)
John Skinner, Principal and Professor of Old Testament Language and Literature, Westminster College, Cambridge (in his commentary on Genesis, page 21) writes,
6-8 Second Work: The Firmament.—The second fiat calls into existence a firmament, whose function is to divide the primeval waters into an upper and lower ocean, leaving a space between as the theater of further creative developments. The “firmament” is the dome of heaven, which to the ancients was no optical illusion, but a material structure, sometimes compared to an “upper chamber” (Ps. 104:12, Am 9:6) supported by “pillars” (Jb 26:11), and resembling in its surface a “molten mirror” (Jb 37:18). Above this are the heavenly waters, from which the rain descends through “windows” or “doors” (Gn 7:11, 8:2, 2 Ki 7:2, 19) opened and shut by God at His pleasure (Ps 78:23).
Claus Westermann, in his 636-page commentary on the Hebrew text of Genesis 1-11, writes on page 116 regarding the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ,
A solid partition that separates the waters above from the surface of the earth and the space between presumes that the rain comes down through openings in the partition, as several passages in the Old Testament indicate. Gen. 7:11f.; 2 kings 7:2, 19; Ps. 104:13.
Gerhard von Rad, in his commentary on Genesis, writes,
The second day brings the creation of the firmament, which the ancients imagined as a giant hemispherical and ponderous bell (Ps. 19:2; Job 37:18). râqı̂ya‛ means that which is firmly hammered, stamped (a word of the same root in Phenician means “tin dish”).
Even more substantial evidence for the correctness of this translation is found in the translation of it in the Septuagint. There, the Hebrew word רָקִיעַ is translated using the Greek word στερέωμα which expresses the concept of “the sky as a supporting structure,
the firmament.” (BDAG [
Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature, Third Edition, the University of Chicago, 2000], the italics are theirs). This Greek word is also found in the New Testament to express the concept of a “state or condition of firm commitment,
firmness, steadfastness” (BDAG, the italics are theirs),
Col. 2.5. εἰ γὰρ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ ἄπειμι, ἀλλὰ τῷ πνεύματι σὺν ὑμῖν εἰμι, χαίρων καὶ βλέπων ὑμῶν τὴν τάξιν καὶ τὸ στερέωμα τῆς εἰς Χριστὸν πίστεως ὑμῶν. (NA28)
Col. 2.5. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, and I rejoice to see your morale and the firmness of your faith in Christ. (NRSV)
Very much more evidence could be cited, but I have been researching and studying the first 11 chapters of Genesis since January 2015, and I have learned that young earth creationists typically believe what they want to believe, and that they view
all evidence against their view to be “worldly” and an assault against God and His word. I have also learned that young earth creationists typically lack sufficient interest in God and His word to invest their money and their time in studying the Bible, and yet they eagerly invest their money and their time in worldly pursuits. Every year, thousands of young people come to the conclusion that the Bible contains more fiction than it does truth—and consequently they reject it and the Jesus that it proclaims. My research into this lethal problem has shown me that young people who are raised in churches that are pastored by men with an excellent university education very seldom come to such a conclusion because they learn growing up that the theory of evolution does not and cannot contradict God’s acts of Creation because the natural sciences and religion do not intersect but run parallel to each other and independently of each other with a line clearly drawn between the two. Scientists are especially careful to avoid crossing that line. When Drs. Rhine and Pratt of Duke University came very close to crossing that line in the 1930’s, they were severely castigated by their peers. However, young earth creationists—including their so-called “scientists”—routinely cross that line—and the consequences to evangelical Christianity have been catastrophic while the teachings of science have triumphed!