When I was in high school and perhaps 2/3rds through college, I was very much into young earth creationism and I felt it was one of the most important movements for biblical Christianity. For several reasons, I have long left that sentiment. I'm no longer comfortable with the way YEC advocates come very close to de-Christianizing orthodox Christians of other views from progressive creationists to theistic evolutionists. I no longer am confident that taking Genesis seriously and authoritatively demands a "literal" interpretation.
Still, I know my place. I began to recognize, even when I was more hyper about the issue, that my limited technical knowledge meant that many of the issues where beyond my ability to judge.
For this reason and perhaps others, while I don't identify with the YEC (Young Earth Creation) movement, I actually don't want them to go away. I don't consider it beyond a reasonable doubt that they may be on to something, that they may indeed come out ahead of the game and may be right about many things. And it's all due to what so many in the 20th century seem to take for granted even if they pay lip service to it. Science is tentative.
I followed an article from popsci on this that serves as a reminder and it involves a matter very important to YEC. Those who have a bone to pick with the idea of an ancient universe or at least an ancient earth have an issue with radio-isotopic dating. It turns out that the decay rates that those methods depend upon are not set in stone and may be altered.
The consequences aren't just for those who have a beef to pick with an ancient age for the universe. Those decay constants are probably linked to many physical principles. Those principles may be wrong. As the article concluded, "Perhaps our understanding of nuclear physics in general -- is a lot weaker than we thought."