In the same way, if a history book of the future were to tell us that mankind almost perished in an all out nuclear war, if true said nuclear war will have left its mark in the real world, even if we were not there to observe it.
Yet people say evolution isn't science because it is about things that happened before recorded history.
Evolution is not a hard science. It is an historical science that tries to reconstruct the unobservable, unrepeatable past. The same hold true for Creation and ID. The question is, which one of these competing hypothesis explain the past better. And as I have demonstrated in post after post, Creation/ID wins the origins debate hands down.
Well you could, but then nobody would pay you a bit of attention. Meanwhile ALOT of people are paying attention to ID/creation.