One more point: it’s my background that got me interested in the biblical text as expressed in ancient Hebrew. The problem, as I saw it back then and still see it today, is that arguments over science and faith most frequently begin at the wrong place. Too many people who disagree, say with YEC, begin by attempting to counter YEC arguments with science.
That’s a totally wrong way of going about these kinds of arguments. The YEC proponent is making a linguistic case for understanding a religious text as a literal, historical account. That’s a perfectly understandable position and the YEC deserves a response that employs linguistic arguments why interpreting ancient Hebrew literally is a recipe for madness.
A quick anecdote: Ken Ham visited Missoula a few months ago and I was asked by a reporter what I thought. Now, I think the reporter had an agenda (to discredit Mr. Ham), but my answer was that to engage YECs with science is pointless. What we need to do is focus on the text of the Bible properly understood. For example, in Genesis 1:5 we first encounter the Hebrew word yom which means light and its counterpart layla means without light. The author is likely attempting to contrast his version of time as untethered to nature with the pagan conception of time as intimately bound to natural cycles.
Blessings,