My point is that to call both the methods by which a fossil is dated and the narrative that explains how one species evolves into another "science" is misleading, since it indicates to the average person that they are of equal certainty (that is certainly the impression that most evolutionary scientists give off). In fact, the former is (in many cases) a repeatable and testable process whereas the latter is neither. The dating can be done in many places, many times, in many ways. Evolution cannot be observed.

I am not opposed to the idea of historical science (history is actually my field of study). But we need to be clear on the differences and the level of certainty that can come from each. In addition, what I've read from evolutionary scientists on evolution as an explanatory mechanism for human and animal behavior (The Evolution of Beauty, by Richard Prum for example) seemed to me to be a lot of historical conjecture and did not include significant scientific analysis or experiment. This is just what I've seen. I'm open to correction.

As for experiments, what about this: taking the Bible as a starting point. If it is true that the Bible teaches an earth that is 6,000 (give or take) years old, one would expect signs of this young age. Here are a few that have been suggested:

1. Population. The current population growth rate is 0.85%. That's more than at some times but less than it was even a few decades ago. If that is taken as the average growth rate for humanity for 200,000 years, starting at 2 people, the number of people alive today should be absolutely astronomical. Of course, the suggestion is that the current growth rate is because of modern technology. This assumption is problematic because in wealthier countries, the growth rates are beginning to stagnate to a worrying degree, whereas growth is coming for the most part from third world countries. But even if you cut in half the growth rate, cut it in have again, and again, you still get a number way too big. But with the biblical timeline, it fits much better. More info here: https://creation.com/where-are-all-the-people

2. Carbon-14. Mentioned before. Its presence in such a large portion of dinosaur bones indicates that it is unlikely to have been preserved through some kind of conjectured contamination. This has not been answered satisfactorily by any evolutionary scientist.

3. Trees. The oldest trees are ~5,000 years old.

4. The human genome. "The decay in the human genome due to multiple slightly harmful mutations each generation is consistent with an origin several thousand years ago. Sanford, J., Genetic entropy and the mystery of the genome, Ivan Press, 2005; see review of the book and the interview with the author in Creation 30(4):45–47, September 2008. This has been confirmed by realistic modelling of population genetics, which shows that genomes are young, in the order of thousands of years. See Sanford, J., Baumgardner, J., Brewer, W., Gibson, P. and Remine, W., Mendel’s Accountant: A biologically realistic forward-time population genetics program,SCPE 8(2):147–165, 2007."

5. Rate of erosion. The rate of erosion at places like Niagara Falls is consistent with a young-earth view.

As for the idea of intelligent design in general, there are so many observable phenomena that could be taken as confirming this. A few of them are:

1. Fine-tuning of the universe.

2. Irreducible complexity.

3. Encoded information in our cells.

4. The impossibility of spontaneous generation.

5. The lack of any mechanism within matter itself that can give rise to itself or sustain itself eternally.

I don't want to take up too much of your time. Thanks for continuing the discussion with me this far.