It is scientifically probable that the Earth is "young"

Thanks to Pro for his responses.I will go down my opponent's responses one at a time."First yes time and Age relativity apply to Earth if you remember what relativity means" This is a straw man fallacy. I didn't say relativity didn't apply to the Earth; I said my opponent hadn't shown how the Earth had relatively gone round in an orbit both ~4.5 billion times and [only] 5,700-10,000 times. "For the classmate earth turned around the earth 50 times but for the astronaut Earth only did these revolution 5 times."No, the Earth would have rotated fifty times: fact. However, due to time dilation caused by the astronaut's immense velocity; time would go slower for the astronaut. But my opponent suggests the Earth would have actually slowed down in its rotation for the sake of the astronaut. Not true; I fear my opponent misunderstands relativity. "You and me agreed that time and age are relative. So time is not absolute there isn"t a clock by witch the universe time guides itself. Time is not objective . The entire Universe does not share and live in the same time span as we." Agreed.My opponent's black hole fact list and scenario are true, but I fail to see how time dilation in a powerful, collapsed star has any relevance to how much orbits the Earth has completed of the Sun. However, when he gets to the "seeing the Earth get destroyed" area; I simply dispute it. If time is "frozen" for the person, then he would not see any change at all, because the light would not reach past the horizon point. Therefore, said being wouldn't be able to see the Earth at all. This analogy is simply false."Imagin to cars on a 20 kilometer high way one goes at 20/kilometers a second and the other goes 20 kilometers an hour .The one going 20 kilometers a second would reach the end of the highway in one second the other would reach the end of the highway in one hour. Imagin that the end of highway is the end of Earth and the speed of the cars is the speed of time to the person in the faster car earth would for him been destroyed way before Earth were gone for the driver on the slower car ." A higher velocity will slow down time around you. So the faster the car, the slower time will go for you. Time is relative. So all it means is that the fast car actually completes the "race" at the same time, it is just that, due to time dilation, the fast car has aged less. They do not reach the end at a different time; even though they're going at different speeds. It is weird, but then again, that's relativity! "it is impossible to say the earth is an age because earth does not exist for people in black holes so earth is nothing." What? The Earth might not exist for people in black holes, but that doesn't mean objectively, it doesn't exist. Not seeing doesn't equal disbelieving. Have you ever seen the grand canyon, notre dame [our lady], Morgan Freeman, caves in Vietnam? If you answer "no" to just one of these, does that mean they don't exist; does that mean they're nothing? Of course not!P1: For people in black holes; the Earth doesn't exist.C: The Earth doesn't exist. [Non-sequiter fallacy] Fallacious reasoning isn't an argument. HoweverFor his final responses, I would ask my opponent to show how the Earth has completed a different number of orbits [alone], without resorting to fallacious reasoning or comparisons. At the moment, my opponent gives examples of how See y'all next round!J