“Recolonisation theory differs from the standard view of Earth history in two respects. Recognising that fossils do not trace the branches of a single ‘tree of life’, it argues that the order of their appearance and the multiplication of fossil species over time represent the gradual recovery of life following Earth’s destruction, an event manifested at the end of the Hadean. The second point of difference is that it does not accept that the rock record suggests a history of billions of years. Proponents of the standard view argue that the rock record is incomplete, even in places where sedimentation appears to have been continuous, and fossils are therefore not expected to show a single branching tree.

This cannot be the most comfortable of positions. In the following articles we show how it is possible to test the geological timescale and generally take a less dogmatic stance on questions of age. The paragraphs below give summaries.”
“How does one date the coming into existence of anything? In the case of the solar system, there are two approaches. One rests on the observation that stars, like animals, go through a cycle of birth, youth, middle age, old age and death. If we could quantify how long a Sun-sized star takes to go through the cycle and determine what stage the Sun is at now, we could estimate the solar system’s age. This would require determining the proportion of hydrogen to helium and then calculating how long it would take for nuclear fusion to convert one into the other. However, the proportion cannot be quantified reliably, because most of the helium lies in the core and estimates based on spectroscopy are only as good as models describing how the interior convects.
The other approach is to assume that meteorites date back to the beginning of the solar system. In an article setting out the limits of solar modelling Christensen-Dalsgaard et al. state,”