There's a divide in the field of Geology between people out in the field banging on rocks, and people in labs and in front of computers running simulations and theorizing. The numbers of the former have been dropping, and the latter have been receiving most of the funding and taking most of the power in Geology departments. Some of the office geologists are beginning to recognize that field work needs to survive, and that those contributions are invaluable.
However, basically ALL of both groups believe the earth to be 4+ billion years old. There's a lot of argument over a lot of things at the moment, Geology is an exciting field; Plate Tectonics in general is essentially pretty much universally accepted, but a lot of the details are fiercely debated. The origin of the Rockies, so called "Hot Spots", the exact mechanism that causes plates to move....all the subjects of fierce debate.
My brother followed in my father's footsteps as a geologist. This is what exactly what his thesis addressed.
OTHO, My father's PhD thesis was about uranium in the New Mexico region.
If the great flood theory proved more useful in finding oil or mineral deposits than the geologic time scale worked out by more than a century of geologists, I'd be happy to take it up. Somehow these creation "scientists" think that geology is like ideology - a matter of indocrination. No. It's a matter of selecting interpretations of evidence that WORK.