Cards on the table time, if you disagree with ANY scientific field of study (or all of them), you do not have to disprove their hypothesis or theory. You really don't need to attack evolution, cosmology, the theory of gravity, the laws of the conservation of energy. You don't have to disprove a damn thing.
Pretty cool huh?
All you have to do is prove your alternative hypothesis. That's literally all you have to do.
Attacking the work of others is a pointless, frustrating, a pathetic waste of energy for yourself, and all you suck in and get involved.
If you can prove your hypothesis guess what? YOU WIN! A NOBEL PRIZE!!!!!!! pretty sweet huh?
Understand that if you can "disprove" evolution, the round earth, cosmology, electricity, gravity, chemistry, biology, all physics, you’ve still failed. Disproving anything does not by extension prove anything about any claim you make. It’s kinda pointless and meaningless and not worth perusing if your goal is to promote an alternative. Just because science is sometimes wrong does not mean you are correct. The burden of proof is on you to prove your position, not make constant digs at other people's proven work. If it's accepted it’s not because some people won a debate. That's not how science works, it means the preponderance of evidence points in that direction. It does not mean that we know everything, we're simply following the evidence. Or as Tucan Sam used to say "Follow your nose"
(Please note if you CAN disprove highly established things in science you will often, by necessity, disprove other parts of science. If you can do that you can potentially prove computers really are magic, or don't exist. I'd really like to see you try to prove computers don't exist. The reason is simple, the theories and laws that define the universe are used in the creation of technology, if science was wrong about almost everything, which would be required to accept any of the pseudoscience positions I have mentioned in my writings, then we would have never invented MOST of the luxuries you have today. That's a fact. Get over it)
If you're going to dig at other people's work at least lay the facts on the table. I'm not talking about conspiracy junk, about how reporters are about as cognitively underdeveloped as the audience they report to. I'm talking show the data that proves your position. What you think and why you think it is the only real thing that matters here.
The frustrating thing about apologetic is they know not to get nailed down, they won't admit what they believe, they'll be dishonest that way. That way even if they can't prove they are correct, they can constantly pretend that you're losing. "Well I don't believe in _______ so why are you creating a straw man against me?"
(well the reason is you said you support young earth creation, but then refused to say what you mean by that, there for your opponent was forced to argue what people know about young earth creation since that's all they must work with).
If you don't openly state your hypothesis you're being dishonest and your opponent’s can not actually debate you, which of course is the point.
You lay your faith based belief out there and I promise you I will try to debunk it, and that's ok. If you're correct I'll find that out. If it stands up to scrutiny and can't be debunked that still doesn't prove it correct though. You still must make models, predictions and prove it for it to be accepted. If you're so sure you're right why won't you openly explain your hypothesis in full let other's try to debunk you? This is at the crux of what differentiates science from fanciful imagination. Everyone is free to challenge science. There's no secret conspiracy, I spent half my life in bio labs, I know a few other's here who can say the same. No one’s who’s been exposed has seen evidence of a conspiracy. Why is that?
If your hypothesis is sound and can be demonstrated to be true, then it will be accepted. Regardless of what you've been brainwashed into believing. If it can't be proven, that's not because mean old scientists won't let you join their club. It's because you're wrong. GET OVER IT. Either give up, or go back to the drawing board and find out why you are wrong and fix it. Educate yourself. That's how science works, it’s not faith based, it’s not a religion, its simply what you can prove to be so. Your methodology must be sound, your logic must be sound, your data has to be correct. Anything else is straight up a lie.
The Scientific standard is straight forward and easy to understand like that. Yet it is a high bar to pass, for a reason. We live we deal with reality. Indulging in fantasy is not productive.