Biblical Creation or Creationism is false

I almost thought you forgot about this lol thanks for responding :) I will start in the reverse. You say my argument is that science proves creationism false. I would say this is true that evidence does in fact disprove the creation hypothesis but then you go off on a tangent about alchemy and trying to say it was science, alchemy never was a science just to let you know ;) And I think you are trapped in this idea that "well science can be wrong and creation right". Science is evidence, the conclusions we make in science are evidence based. You make an assertion that scientists presume the earth is old, well they all thought it was relatively young until evidence cam about that it wasn't. Science is not a religion that has things you must believe it is people studying the world and making evidence based, testable conclusions off of them. If creation is true then scientists would have found evidence for this. Why does the scientific community agree the earth is old? Or that evolution is a fact of biology? It's because of evidence, loads of mutually supporting evidence. They didn't get together and say "you know what? I think the earth should be a few million or more years old" I mean do you really think they all are teamed up to create an imaginary model (as you say) where Adam and Eve aren't real? Next you refuse to answer the bottle neck question. Now I understand you say you are not knowledgeable about the subject but never the less this is a scientific fact that should never had been discovered if the creation story is true. You will have to deal with this one day in your life unless you just shove things off that don't sound like they agree with creation as I know many creationists do. As far as dating methods it is clear you have nothing to rebuke the multiple methods with. So I can say this is still a problem for you but again I suspect such things are shrugged off and ignored any way but let me bring another problem to you. I will use the example of the multiple ice layers in the arctic. Now there are over 680,000 layers so far drilled through by scientists (there are way more but of course the arctic wasn't always the arctic so you don't need one for all 4.5 billion years do you). Each layer comes down as snow every winter once a year. Makes sense right? Well if the earth is only 6000 years old or even just 10,000 then you are dealing with a massive amount of summer-winter cycles every year to this day as in you would still be seeing it today. So fine if you really don't like testable evidence just take the kind you can grab a drill, pull out and look at for yourself and observe it, oh wait those are the same thing never mind! Now this point was brought up in a debate and the creationist then said "well what about times when you may have gotten 100ft of snow would that just add to it?" Well no actually it would not. No matter how deep the snow gets it only ever leaves one layer. whether its 2ft or 200ft still one layer and we see this today. Now about your first complaint. If you seriously think I would take an objection to dating methods (all 20+ of them) that had no evidence and no backing by scientists you are out of your mind of course I want you to find an evidence based, peer reviewed source, did I stutter? Lastly let me make this point. There is no faith in science at all. I have no faith in science. I need evidence to think something is true, faith is believing without evidence. I think evolution is true because of evidence, I think the earth is really old because of evidence, facts, yes I do need those to say something is true. I"m also willing to change my mind when new evidence comes about. I used to think global warming was nuts, now I don't. Well let me add one more thing. Please explain Neanderthals and other cousins to us humans. Other creatures of the genus homo made fire, music, art, religion and clothing before us. If Adam and Eve were real where did the other intelligent species come from?