I do not think it would be reasonable to make such a claim, and would certainly not attempt to verify it. I would, on the basis of what I perceive to be factual data, point to artifacts which, to the experience of most observers, date beyond last Thursday.
But you open up a provocative set of questions related to epistemology. When you think about it, if our brains are but chemical reactions produced by natural processes outside of intelligent design, who is to say for sure such a claim is not TRUE?!
Don't forget, it has been made to look as if it dates beyond last Thursday ;)
When you think about it, if our brains are but chemical reactions produced by natural processes outside of intelligent design, who is to say for sure such a claim is not TRUE?!
As opposed to what? Ectoplasmic or spiritual reactions?
But even if we were intelligently designed and our minds are not "only" processes in a material brain (but processes in some kind of supernatural entity) we cannot say whether this designer isn't also the product of an even higher intelligent entity (e.g. super[2]natural) and so on? In other words it's Turtles all the way up.
And that's exactly what Occams Razor is about. If there is no way to tell whether [A] or NOT[A] is true, NOT[A] is assumed unless we find compelling evidence for [A].
Isn't that the exact point we make to the YEC-ists?
Clearly the two beliefs, YEC-ism and Last Thursday-ism, are equally indistinguishable, both intellectually and philosophically. And equally indefensible with respect to any material evidence.