The honest ones might consider that the "day of Man" is about 6000 years according to Genesis (and a bit of counting,) and the dishonest ones who refuse to look at that text will continue to say things that it does not really say.
S.J. Gould at least had that part correct when it came to people actually refusing to look inside of a horse's mouth in order to determine how many teeth were inside of it.
The 6,000-10,000 date has always seemed to me to be a closer depiction of how old the Jewish religion was thus how old the bible is and right about when the first worshippers of yahweh started writing down their beliefs.
I could be wrong but its just the way that rubbed me when I first heard about a "young earth theory".
That's my point. A literal interpretation of Genesis is irreconcilable with scientific observations. If you want to say that the Bible trumps the evidence from geology, paleontology, and physics, that's fine. I disagree, but at least it's a coherent position. It's when people start misrepresenting the evidence that I have a problem.