The Earth is NOT 6,000 years old

Allow me to conclude my arguments. BUT IT’S GOD, BRAH. Now, you have the BOP to show that God exists. Which you do not do. Well you can completely ignore all that stuff because it doesn’t matter. In this video we see an ordinary human using cheap materials to make her piece of paper look ancient. If we accept that the God of the Bible is real (we’ll come to that) then surely he could use his omnipotent power to create a Universe with the illusion of age. The video fails. The problem is that, while they made it look ancient, there was no dating done on it afterwards. If the dating would have shown it to be ancient, then we can conclude that my arguments are wrong and go out the window. However, this is how we can spot forgeries in papers--we look at the dating of the paper and see how old it really is! Oh, and you still have to show that the God of the Bible is real. Besides, why would God make an illusion that shows that the universe is billions of years old? What is the purpose? My opponent suggests that God created a universe with age, but this is illogical. This asserts that God created stones with a strange ratio of parent to daughter material indicating age and somehow the other rocks in the earth correlate with these dates. We can observe that time has gone into the geology around us. This also asserts that God sped up the light from the distant galaxies so that they would reach earth in six days despite being 13 billion light-years away, but for what purpose? Yes, Adam was not created as an infant, yet as far as we know, he did not physically age, he was 0 years old. He wouldn't have had wrinkles and white hair. Creating a perfect universe with billions of years of age would not make sense, and God is not illogical. (That is, if we assume the God my opponent is talking about exists. God is not the author of confusion; therefore, why would he "confuse" people with the age of the universe? )Now, I come to the coup de grace. My opponent has left no room for doubt in any of his assertions:"The Earth is NOT 6,000 years old""In this debate, I will attempt to show that the Earth is more than 6,000 years old (An estimated 4.6 billion years old)""Science has proven that the Earth is 4.6 byo""Given that science has proven an old earth, one can conclude that the Earth is 4.6 byo. "My opponent’s burden of proof is crippling! How is my BOP crippling? I just shown how illogical your arguments were. My opponent has been a bit overzealous; Science hasn’t ‘proven’ anything. It presents the best theories based on the evidence. There is no doubt that an all-powerful God could create a Universe with all the bells and whistles to suggest it is 13.75 gigayears old, especially if he had 7 days to do it! So, science hasn't proven the sky is blue, gravity exists and the Earth is a sphere? What? You can't ignore all the evidence for an old earth. We know that the Bible is to be interpreted somewhat literally (because it says so, duh! ):2 Corinthians 4:2: “Rather, we have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. ”Proverbs 8:8–9: “All the utterances of my mouth are in righteousness; There is nothing crooked or perverted in them. They are all straightforward to him who understands, And right to those who find knowledge. ”Yet there are some verses that Christians say are "Metamorphical. " hmm. Interesting. Is it really logical for people to live 900+ years? No. Disease, famine and overpopulation would have killed everyone out. You think overpopulation is such a threat to us now--imagine what it would be if everyone lived for 900+ years! God works in mysterious ways is a very useful argument to dodge what the Bible says and what reality is. Why vote pro?1) I have given scientific evidence for the age of the earth to be 4.6 byo and not 6,000 y/o.2) My opponent has not given one shread of scientific evidence to show that the Earth is young. (Biblical evidence does NOT count as scientific. )3) My opponent has not refuted a single claim of mine. As for my comment in the previous round, I appologize to my opponent as I did not recieve the reason for forfeit. I accept his reason for the forfeit.