Creationists are adept at criticizing evolution as it cannot explain how life started through the different scientific field of abiogenesis. They are also able to point out the "flaws" in radio dating techniques, speed of light, quantum mechanics and showing that these fields of science are incoherent with other scientific advancements. This is frustrating for scientists, as we look at their explanations and see that they do not fit the models and the data. Yet, the creationists have a point as they are essentially pointing out that the theories we deal with are not unified. This is something scientists would agree with as the classic example of reconciling gravity and quantum mechanics is a problem that physicists have been working on for years. Additionally, even if we unified quantum mechanics and gravity this, would only be the first step towards unifying physics with chemistry to biology and only then would we have a unified theory that would satisfy creationists. Ok, probably not satisfy creationists but I think you get my point.
On the other hand we have the creationist theory of the Universe. This theory encompasses everything! It explains the pre-Universe and how the universe came into being, it unites gravity and its version of the quantum theory, it shows how life can start and how evolution is not necessary while at the same time allowing for adaptation or what is termed micro-evolution. At the same time it explains how we orbit the sun and how Noah got all the animals onto a wood boat and fed them for a year. Additionally, it explains how the kangaroos got to Australia after the flood when the world was undergoing major seismic shifts. Essentially, this theory combines every scientific field and flows from one field to the other without any hiccups. Additionally, it does all of this without contradicting the Bible. Lest we forget also that this theory could save governments and research institutions like CERN billions and billions of dollars by doing away with redundant research. It truly is deserving of all the scientific prizes in any single year for a major leap forward in mans scientific understanding.
Unfortunately, such a unifying creationist theory explaining all the math, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, replication, adaptation etc. does not exist. Until it exists, then surely it should not be taken seriously? If your focus is attacking other theories without presenting a working theory of your own then you have nothing. This is just not the way science works.