... Born Again Bible Christian without any Pope above self?
Short of it is: no, you cannot be all of these, it might mean one as well as other, or neither but something else.
I am Catholic. I was just in a French FB debate defending the rights of Catholics to be creationist.
... Having Cognitive Problems?
Now, that is very self serving of evolutionists to think so. If they do that.
... A Sceptic who does not accept any proof as valid?
Same response. Telling people "that creationist is intelligent, but he does not believe one can prove reality is more than his own illusion" or some similar ultra-sceptic idiocy attributed to me is a means of trying to scare people away from my creationist writings.
I do accept certain proofs as valid, even parts of evolutionist proofs. But I do not accept certain other proofs as valid. One I do not accept as validly proving evolutionist scenario against young earth creationist scenario is "there are millions of concurring facts" when each of them is just as much a proof of a young earth scenario, since completely compatible with it.
Indeed I am. Each proof that "earth turns around its own axis in 24 h." is compatible with universe turning around earth's axis in 24 h. Each optical proof that "all planets including earth" turn around sun is compatible with sun and moon turning around earth in year and moon, and other close celestial bodies, around sun.
In the case of circumstantial evidence being not clearly favouring one of either alternatives, I opt for the most straightforward evidence: eyes and balance sense about earth standing still, history, even holy history, about earth being created nearly within the span of human existence and there being a line, a lineage, from first man to survivor of flood, from survivor of flood to Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus Christ.
Friday before Pentecost
2010, Paris, Beaubourg
... not yet married?
How did you know? Did they harass creationists at your school too, so they got no girl friends?