According to the Bible, Adam and Eve are about 12,000 years old.

I accept. I only have a half hour to post my argument, but there isn't much to say. My opponent, obviously, has the burden of proof -- he has to affirm the resolution conclusively. However, he hasn't done that. He hasn't referenced his figures nor explained the research he claims to have done or math he claims to have found. Everything is speculation at this point. Thus, the debate is already over. I will however respond to the relevant portions of his argument, as most of it is irrelevant to him fulfilling his burden of proof. "I researched some for about a day and estimate the real ages to Adam and Eve 12,535- 12,850 years old."There are a number of problems with this. First of all, where is his source? Where did he find this number? Why should we believe merely by virtue of his asserting it? We have no reason to fall it, so we should be able to drop it immediately. Second, my opponent says that Adam and Eve ARE X years old. However, how is this possible when Adam and Eve, even if they existed (by the way, there is no evidence for their actual, literal existence), they would be MUCH older than the amount of years PRO has offered. According to Genesis 5:5- "So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died" (1). The Bible postulates that the Earth is only 6,000 years old (2). Therefore, it isn't even possible for PRO's number to hold. Now, PRO has claimed that the "seven day" figure the Bible has offered was symbolic, not metaphorical. However, this itself would negate the resolution. The resolution begins with "according to the Bible," not "according to Pro." If PRO considers a metaphorical interpretation, he is moving beyond the confines of Scripture and thus beyond the confines of this resolution. Again, according to the Bible, the Earth is 6,000 years old. And, of course, he hasn't even provided us with the math of how he tabulated that figure. I am not responsible, nor is our audience, to figure out how in the world PRO came to that number or to check his math. HE needs to provide us with his calculations. I could make a claim that is equally as credible as PRO's and say that, according to the math I just did in my notebook, Adam and Eve were 13,000 years old. But that's meaningless unless I provide you with the methodology so that my claim is actually falsifiable. The most troubling argument I could put forward, tohugh, is that even if PRO's number were true, it negates the resolution. For PRO to uphold his BOP, he needs to demonstrate that Adam and Eve are "about" -- "about" means "almost or nearly" (3) -- 12,000 years old. 12,850 years is NOT "about" 12,000 years. So even if PRO's number actually held -- mind you, we have NO reason to think that it does because he hasn't provided us with any reason to think as much by not showing his work (every math teacher I know won't give any credit for an answer if you don't show you work, FYI) -- it wouldn't bear out this resolution. The next flaw in PRO's argument, which actually demonstrates to us that his math is completely wrong, is when he says this: "I "ASSUME" that Adam & Eve lived in the garden for about 0-315 years respectably." This assumption, however, is farfetched and inaccurate. According to Christianlibrary.org, "We do not know how long Adam lived in Garden of Eden. It would simply be a matter of speculation" (1). We have no reason to accept this assumption, which means that we can conclude just from this that PRO's math is wildly off and there is no way that his number can be accurate. Conclusion PRO has not fulfilled his burden of proof and we have no reason to accept his number or his math as correct or in accordance with the Scriptures.Vote CON. (1) http://www.christianlibrary.org...;(2) http://creation.com...;(3) http://www.merriam-webster.com...;