You wrote:
If your view were incorrect, how could someone prove it to you?
Yes, this is a serious question, so think about the answer.
No one thing could do it to me. I have pondered the question. I have read http://www.answersingenesis.org.
and other organizations and find them either venomous or ridiculous. I find much of the creationists' arguments weak and lacking. For ex: The creationists often claim the continents should have washed away by now. Such an understanding conveys no appreciation of plate tectonics, where the surface is recycled.
Some creationists rise above the rest. These often have more subtle errors. Answers in Genesis is of the more subtle variety.
The only group of creationists I know to have good strong mettle, the ability to do hard math, and a muted case are Lambert Dolphin and Barry Setterfield. Both are mathematically adept. Dolphin is a pleasant fellow and will answer emails. Try him at lambert@ldolphin.org. He runs what is probably the most intellectual Christian apologetics site on the Internet. Scholarly papers and real audio Bible studies. Low on graphics. Hence easy to load.
http://www.ldolphin.org/asstbib.shtml
And for his real audio discussions: http://www.ldolphin.org/audio.html
But his whole thesis and Setterfield's thesis is that c is variant. I see little evidence for that. I think what they detect is measurement precision error.
Still if you are into that stuff, try Lambert Dolphin's Website. It is the best of this sort of the web. Only necessary graphics. Lots of articles on everything. And when dealing with science....He actually uses differential equations; NOT Kent Hovind's or Ken Ham's cute pictures.
Dolphin and I have corresponded by email. He is charitable though he knows I am a theistic evolutionist. [I correspond by a different moniker.]
If Dolphin has not convinced me yet, you probably will not. If I am ever convinced, it will probably be by Dolphin.
I hope that answers that question. There is a body of good sturdy physics to argue in favor of the big bang and evolution. Kenneth Miller's discussion on Isochronic radiodating in DARWIN'S GOD is outstanding.
Answers in Genesis attacked Miller for being Catholic which is an ad hominem attack. I am no fan of Catholicism, having left it myself for evangelical faiths, but they said he was not Christian because he was Catholic. A horrific example of close-minded views. So typical of many creationist sites. And alas of http://talkorigins.org , an evolutionary site.
My view is that God is outside the Big Bang and behind the veil of the Quantum soup. Therefore he can control events subtly in ways which seem random to us. So Evolution and the Big Bang are true but ordered, not accidental. On our side of the quantum veil we only perceive it as chance.
This is similar to Polkinghorne's view, I think, or Michael Denton's.
It is the insistence on a literal six day view which I find deleterious. Dolphin is obviously a literalist but he is charitable to those who differ.
Whether one is evolutionary like me or a six-dayer, Christ will be returning soon enough. We can ask him then: Literal or metaphor?
. So, no one thing could do it. The Question is NOT that easy.