Still waiting for that observation that would make you give up creationism. If there isn't one, (and I believe there isn't), then it isn't science. I don't maintain that science has all the answers, but when we teach kids science, we should stick to science.
You must be mistaking me for a proponent of creation teaching injected into scientific disciplines. Bringing creation into science is no more necessary than bringing in evolution. These only serve to muddy the discipline of observing and testing the given universe. Both viewpoints exceed the bounds of science in the strict sense when they rely upon the unobservable. If they want to incorporate notions of history into their explanations, fine, but don't call it "science" in the strict sense.