Did they consider cycling? The flipping of the poles? Ignoring some data, while focusing on one set to fit a conclusion. Not saying impossible, it just ignores too much other evidence.
Did they consider ANYTHING that would go against their preconceived notions? Of course not!
Being a creationist means never having to let a silly little thing like evidence change what you believe about the natural world.
Evidence is to be ignored, while focusing on the one thing they can find that seems to fit their previously arrived at and ‘not to be questioned because it is from God’ conclusion.
Speaking of that, I wonder how the YEC crowd explains the magnetic striping of the Earth's ocean floors.