I'm a YEC. Challenge me.

[Esquilax]

A few links (I had to look them up real quick):
http://creation.com/young-saturn
http://www.icr.org/article/7200/
Items 1 – 3 here: http://www.icr.org/articles/view/1842/264/
Items 65 through 95 here: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

Okay, and now we're going to play a little game called "what isn't science?"

For starters, this isn't science:

By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record.

This is what we call a dishonest presupposition, or an agenda: it means I don't have to take seriously anything coming out of this source, and you shouldn't either, because they've admitted they're only accepting findings that prove their position and not mainstream science.

This also isn't science:

We believe God has raised up ICR to spearhead Biblical Christianity's defense against the godless dogma of evolutionary humanism.

Again, an agenda from a source that can't even get accredited, and isn't a scientific organization. Why would I take this seriously?

Would you accept the findings of an organization that proudly espoused an anti-theistic bias right on their website, in plain english? I doubt it.

---

You might as well just say that a space wizard farted on reality, and his cosmologically arcane fart gas caused everything to age a bunch.

At the moment, both claims have the same level of evidence. Care to add some more to yours?

Yes, they (almost) do.

No, not really. I just like mine better.

So, are you interested in what is true, or what you want to believe?