No offense, but the best proof of creation of a young earth or whatever is the lack of proof for evolution. Neither can be proven scientifically, so both are theories, and both are based off belief. I just belive evolution to be a lie, as the age is based off of radiocarbon dating, which is terribly inaccurate. Radiocarbon dating has been proven inaccurate by the fact that it dated a freshly killed seal at 1300 years, had a 15,000 year difference in ages from samples taken of the same block of peat, dated a living snail shell at 27,000 years old, and dated a piece of coal that was documented to be 1680 years old at 300,000,000 years. The very most a C-14 dating can give you is 60,000 years because of its half life of 5,730 years. However, the story presented by the bible, with a water dome around the earth and the flood explains the levels of C-14. Also, the Geological timeline that scientists use by looking at rock layers is very inconsistant and a very small percentage of the world actually matches up with it. So, like I said before, the best reason to chose to belive creation is the lack of proof for evolution. Also, the documented timeline for Jesus's ancestory is actually good proof, but, just like Nacho Libre's partner, I guess you're all saying "I only belive in science..."
