Also, I would like to take this opportunity to apologize for not posting my position in the age of the universe debate in my reply last night. If any are interested, it is posted here.
I am not exactly a scientist, although I work with some scientists and I have written software routines that some scientists use in their work. I see a place for faith and science but they are two different things with different "missions" and one should not be confused with the other. Why is that so hard for people to accept? Just because the Pioneer probes have a slightly different trajectory than predicted does not invalidate modern cosmology and it does not prove YEC! It does not prove any thing at this point.
Anyway, one of my main gripes is that those who want to use their reading of the Bible to invalidate modern science are doing something that has serious consequences. For example, most Christians believe that life begins at conception. And this idea makes good sense even if you leave religion out of it (I am not saying that religion should be remov ed from moral arguments). Now, suppose some conservative is being questioned about abortion and he says, "I believe life begins at conception because the Bible says so." Then he is asked what else he believes and he answers, "The Bible clearly says that the earth is 6000 years old, humans and dinosaurs co-existed until about the time of the Roman Empire, the sun is at the center of the universe and other stars are some sort of optical illusion, the speed of light is something modern secular humanists made up to confuse people and you might be a monkey but I ain't! The Bible teaches all the science I need to know!" Guess what? Any legitimate argument the speaker may have had against abortion is obscured by all of the irrelevant, ignorant baggage the speaker brought to the table.