Nice try, but you're missing a rather important point. When the ICR's Steve Austin, for example, writes his articles and produces his videos on Mt. St. Helens, Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, etc. Instead, he trumpets his PhD and purports to be offering up serious geology when he is, instead, supporting Creationist Flood dynamics hypotheses. It is proper to expose such charlatans and their agendas for who and what they really are. Creationists do not use the term haphazardly and scientists do not use the term at all to apply to themselves.
Scientists refer to each other by their proper degrees and academic affiliations.
I copied over my main one. Your 230,000 year dating on Neanderthal is based on the oldest find from that species. The indicated split in Goodwin's article is actually about 500,000 years ago, about the time Homo Sapiens is supposed to have first appeared. So this would indicate that the modern human lineage and the neanderthal lineage was already splitting at the when the first Homo Sapiens fossils are dated. I asked you to name two such finds.