Creationists have a lot of work ahead of them. Glenn does raise some rather good points in his post, but IMHO the accusations are misdirected. I really do believe that it is the process that gives rise to the conclusions, i.e. the philosophy, the assumptions, and the methodology, that inevitably results into two widely divergent views. In point of fact, we are naked. This goes both ways.
Good science is good science, wherever one comes from.
Logical conclusions are drawn establishing the relative time period for that form walking the earth. There is nothing wrong with this, provided that one recognizes the assumptions and methodologies and correctly presents the conclusions. To be honest and admit that is good science. Truly, it would also be the mark of a Christian to admit to it as well.