There is No Biblical Support for Young Earth Creationism

My opponent says that I am mistaken. He says I am using the Bible out of context. Please, tell me how and where. All of these references lead to the next, and are completely related. Where am I wrong? Here is my opponent's line of thinking: 1-The Bible is true 2-Stuff on this Earth is older than 4,000 years, 4.6 billion in fact 3-The Bible must support truth since the Bible is true. There are many flaws with this logic. The main one I will talk about is his assumption that we have evidence much older than 4,000 years. How can he prove this? Was here there when these "books" were written? Of course not. Well, he might say now: "That is absurd. Of course I wasn't there. We use other methods to tell somethings age." Like what? Radiometric dating? Carbon half-lives? These are extremely faulty methods, and have been proven inaccurate multiple times. http://www.cs.unc.edu... methods in general are inaccurate So, my opponent cannot prove that we have these old artifacts. He now argues that there are processes that take millions of years. The problems with this accusation are threefold. One, he gives NO examples, no evidence, and no warrant. But for the sake of the debate, we will assume that there are. So, one might be the Grand Canyon, right? That took millions of years, right? Now to the second fallacy here. OK, so the Grand Canyon. Millions of years to carve out, right? If my opponent truly believed in the bible, and CORRECTLY INTERPRETED IT, he would see no problem to YEC that the Grand Canyon supposedly poses. What about Noah's Flood? Could that torrent not have carved out a canyon. To wipe out all of humanity, it seems you would need a massive flood, enough to even carve a canyon. If my opponent responds no to this statement, he would be trying to limit the power of God. This would be contradictory. Thirdly, does my opponent believe that God created everything flat? Everything in a perfect equilibrium? Of course not! He created a beautiful, diverse world. This is also contradictory to my opponent's logic. So my opponent has made two accusations. 1-I misinterpreted the Bible. Please tell me where and how! If you provide no alternative, then there is no other option! 2-We have evidence of old artifacts and events. I have already addressed this. Please see my above argument. So, both of my opponent's points have fallen. His logic failed him, since it contains falsehoods. I challenge you, opponent, to prove me wrong here. With no case and no reasoning, My opponent's entire argument fails. Now my argument IS supported. It is supported BY THE BIBLE, something we both agree on as true. How then can my opponent deny the unmistakable evidence in this true and Holy document? My case has excellent logic, and is supported by the Bible. Therefore, it stands strong. I leave my opponent with three challenges. One, to prove the existence of these extremely old documents. You must prove that they are that old, which is an IMPOSSIBLE task. Two, you must also prove that God could not have created the Earth how it is today, and that it has changed over billions of years. (Another impossible task) You must limit God's power so that he COULD NOT have done it himself. And three, Interpret the Bible correctly. You said I incorrectly did this. You did not say how, or when, or where. If the Bible is not being literal when it clearly states the family tree of Jesus, Noah, and others that can be traced, followed, and accurately dated, what IS it saying? If not how old the Earth is, THEN WHAT? You MUST answer all three challenges in order to win this debate. If unable to do so, you have certainly lost.