So I was debating a creationist, and after much back and forth, this was his response:
"(Insert Pleasantries Here)...but you still haven't proven anything. Man has a science that states this is that old and that is this old, there is no proof whatsoever that its correct because we have nothing to compare it to for accuracy. I'm not saying what is correct but science sure doesn't deserve to be the last word on this subject, it was created by man and as far as I know he still doesn't walk on water."
There are a number of obvious points I'm going to bring up-science never proves anything and the like- but what is the best response to the first sentence? Is a simple self check- I.E. Every method provides the same result, we can check against other isotopes- the best answer? Or is there a deeper response?
"(Insert Pleasantries Here)...but you still haven't proven anything. Man has a science that states this is that old and that is this old, there is no proof whatsoever that its correct because we have nothing to compare it to for accuracy. I'm not saying what is correct but science sure doesn't deserve to be the last word on this subject, it was created by man and as far as I know he still doesn't walk on water."
There are a number of obvious points I'm going to bring up-science never proves anything and the like- but what is the best response to the first sentence? Is a simple self check- I.E. Every method provides the same result, we can check against other isotopes- the best answer? Or is there a deeper response?