The more you flail, the more water you take on.

Says the Christian who came into a thread to nitpick trivia,

consistently proved me right,

claimed to be speaking about facts,

insists we have to assume an unfalsifiable is false to consider something demonstrable as fact

and now is appealing to a pedantic distinction.

Ok honey.

You said, unequivocally:

We can prove the age of the universe so long as we assume the hypothesis is false.

"The Hypothesis" here is explicitly

You’re free to reject the Omphalos hypothesis

We don't have to assume the Omphalos is false, because its unfalsifiable.

If we have to assume the omphalos is false we have to assume every single unfalsifiable thing is false as well, thats not how science work. We can just disregard unfalsifiable things out of hand.

That's a given when talking about facts. I.e. Things that are falsifiable.

If you consider messing up trivia about the bible to be "simply wrong" you are well past "egregious error" at this point buddy.