But, of a truth, I see the young earth creationist's difficulty as a matter of doctrine - most especially, how these passages are discerned:
So also [is] the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam [was made] a quickening spirit. Howbeit that [was] not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man [is] of the earth, earthy: the second man [is] the Lord from heaven. As [is] the earthy, such [are] they also that are earthy: and as [is] the heavenly, such [are] they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. I Corinthians 15:4248
Of those who see him as the first mortal man, there are some who believe God created an old looking universe about 6,000 years ago (Gosse Omphalos hypothesis) and there are some who believe the physical evidence will comport with a 6,000 year age. But both are a statement of faith and facts cannot trump Truth.
For me there is no inconsistency with the time involved due to inflationary theory and relativity, i.e. 6 equivalent days at the inception space/time coordinates are equal to approximately 15 billion years at our space/time coordinates. Also I have no problem with Adam, since I discern Genesis 1 and 2 speaking of the creation of both the spiritual and the physical worlds that Adam was banished to mortality in Genesis 4.
Another way of dealing with this quandry is to admit one doesn't know everything, and possibly to admit that one isn't even capable of knowing everything.
My beef is with those who distort or deny physical evidence in an attempt to prove something that they cannot possibly know.