Proof!! Keep shaking your head!!!!!! Where is the proof of BBT or evolution? It's the exact same proof we use for a young earth. And if you take a seriously objective look at the evidence, you'd have to agree the earth and our solar system has to be young. It has to be!
It has to be? Are you saying that because there is no other explanation or because that is the result required for you to be comfortable in your beliefs?
Young earth? How do you interpret the many layers of fossils, always in the same order, found throughout the world? How do you explain that there are some fossils that are only found in two places in the world. In relatively limited areas on the east coast of South America and on the west coast of the African continent. In exactly the spots where the two continents were clearly attached hundreds of milliions of years ago. What other explanation can there be for such facts? The thousands and thousands of layers of rock. The hundreds of thousands of layers of ice in Antarctic and Greenland ice fields. A moon that circles us without an atmosphere that is covered, and I mean covered, by millions of craters caused by meteors and asteroids and comets. Seen it hit lately? Does the moon get hit by large flying rocks on a regular basis? If the earth and moon are only 6,000 years old, why weren't your biblical buddies mentioning all the huge explosions on the moon? You would think someone would have brought it up.
If they happened for the most part long before humans were able to survive on the planet, then not much would happen in the timespan of our species. The reason the two didn't coexist is because when the moon was getting peppered, so to was the earth, and it was sort of hard to survive so many flying rocks.
There are trees in the mountains of California that are 5,000 years old. There are other colonies of trees that have been shown to be 80,000 years old, but not the individual trees, so I won't ask you to believe those numbers. Tree rings don't lie, though.
Archaeologists in the US are finding evidence of human habitation over 10,000 years old, and this is the last part of the world settled. Why would there be evidence of campsites all over the country buried 10 and 12 and 14 feet deep. How did they get so deep. We're not talking towns and villages, just campsites.
When was the ice age? The evidence for huge glaciers covering the northern areas of America, Europe and Asia are beyond dispute. Yet there is no mention in the bible of such events. Colder than crap and Moses doesn't complain? Is that how Jesus walked on water. It was ice? No, the glaciers didn't go that far south, but I'm guessing the weather was a bit different for awhile. And if the glaciers were in Europe during early biblical times, why are there archaeological ruins ten thousand years old and more in northern europe? (and you can't go around saying hey look, archaeologists have found ruins of a city that was mentioned in the bible, so it must be true, and then poo-poo other archaeological finds that don't match your little tale).
The current count of 300 sextillion stars in the universe (spread across at least 100,000,000,000 galaxies), are completely consistent with the big bang. And sort of a strange thing for god to do if earth gets equal billing, as in "In the beginning, god created the heavens and the earth". The need for 299,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 extra stars was what?
What science has is consistency. Geology agrees with paleontology which agree with chemistry which matches up well with biology. We also have the aforementioned archaeology and other sciences who find collaborating evidence for a much, much older planet and a much much older universe than the one you hope we have. We have medical researchers today using the principals of evolution to create new medicines. And there are succeeding. If evolution is bunk, why does it work?
We have way too much information confirming our assumptions for you to be able to dismiss them with the phrase "It has to be". You're gonna need to provide a lot more than mere desperation to get us to consider your side of the argument.
If you can provide objective interpretations of evidence, do so. But until then, just claiming you have some won't cut it around here or anywhere else.