The illusion of “all the evidence points to evolution/m.o.y./b.o.y.” is created by starting with a paradigm/fake-reality that is based on presuppositions of Atheism, Naturalism, Materialism, Uniformitarianism (no creation or flood), and Evolutionism. Of course, beginning with unproven and unprovable presuppositions that are exactly what they are trying to prove is circular reasoning. This paradigm/fake-reality is so powerful that it seems to be more real than real reality, and scientists who are blinded by it adjust real observations to fit the paradigm. So, if the lab gives a date for a rock that doesn’t fit the paradigm, the scientists “interpret” the data so it fits the paradigm. In other words, they reject the date given by the lab and change it to fit the paradigm. There are standard assumptions that are used to “prove” billions/millions of years and evolution, but all assumptions are arbitrary. There are standard just-so stories that are told to  “prove” billions/millions of years and evolution, but all assumptions are fabrications/lies. Evolutionism is, itself, merely a fabrication, and every so-called “evidence” for it is based on more fabrications, arbitrary assumptions, irrational thinking, or outright lies.

For instance, there is no natural process that will add information to anything. For even the smallest step in the story of evolution to have been possible would have required a lot of just the right kind of universal information being added to a cell by natural processes. But than never happens. Billions of your tax dollars have been spent trying to make it happen. Lies to the rescue! Any change to the genome is interpreted as an addition of information when it is always a loss of information. Duplication of the same information is interpreted as an addition of new information when, in fact, it is not new information and usually quite destructive. Changes that happen because there is tremendous ability to adapt programmed into the genome of every living cell are also interpreted as the addition of new information when this is actually the use of previously existing information. Then, outright lies are printed into the textbooks, claiming that we observe molecules-to-man evolution happening every day, citing these bogus examples. (A good book on the scientific Laws of Universal Information is "Without Excuse" by Werner Gitt. See also: Information Theory Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. Here is another interesting article.) More is constantly being learned about information and about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened." By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities. The probabilities show the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story to be a bazaar hypothesis, a story that is so improbable that it should not be considered. However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation. (See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning). God says that He created everything. He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature. He is the One Who will judge all of us in the end. We know that because we know Him presonally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ and the moment-by-moment instruction of the Holy Spirit.

In the same way, Distant Starlight is often used to try to "prove" an old Universe. However, several assumptions are being made:

1. They assume materialism and naturalism; both materialism and naturalism assume no God.
2. They assume God could not have, either by supernatural or natural means, have caused more time to pass in most of the Universe while little or no time passed on Earth.
3. They assume that they know every mechanism that there is no other scientific discovery that explains how light could have gotten to the Earth.
4. They assume that the one-way speed of light (which cannot be measured) is the same as the two-way speed of light (which can be measured).
5. The assume, prophetically, that one day there will be a scientific discovery that explains the horizon problem (an unsolvable light-travel problem that makes the old-Universe story scientifically impossible.
6. They assume that it is irrational to say that God did anything when, in fact, it is irrational not to admit that God is the One Who is enforcing all the regularity that we call the natural laws. Without that, doing science would be impossible.

All of this is presented deceitfully in the textbooks with a one-sided slant and as if it were reasonable to beleive that the Universe is billions of years old.