I'm in two minds about Creationism.
It is quite different from most other religious beliefs. Most of them cannot be disproved since they deal with things outside or before the physical universe.
However Creationism is laughably stupid, and thus is better seen as an attack on Christianity, though not of religion in general, as the God it descibes is clearly not the Christian one.
Creationists postulate a universe where God has set out to actively deceive us. Thus the universe is not how we perceive it, but rigged to look as if it's billions of years old, and to seem that life evolved rather than was created.
This of course may be true, and the idea is commonly used in both philosophy and theology. If you have an omnipotent God he can do this stuff, how could you tell ?
Their model of God also has him as an "intelligent designer". This is an interesting slander upon God.
Humans have several huge design flaws.
We have the gene to produce vitamin C. But it's broken, causing many humans to die of scutvy and other deficiencies.
Our windpipe and oesophagus are the "wrong" way round, and again thousands of people die each year through food going down the wrong way. Simply swapping their position would be a far better "design".
There are things like our appendix which serve no purpose whatsoever, but occasionaly burst causing a painful death unless treated.
Then there's the whole issue of kids heads being far too large. Without medical care, a large % of them would be born dead. The evolutionary position is that we've lived in groups long enough to get away with this.
Thus the Creationist/Intelligent design people see God as deceptive and frankly not very bright. This is not God as I was taught it at a Catholic school. We had another name for a great deciever, it was Satan. Though even then he was suppose to be smart. As Heinlein says, people rarely invent a God smarter than them, and given that we are dealing with evangelical Christians, that's a very low standard.
Intelligent Design has thus been denounced by the Catholic church as "ill founded", basically rubbish. If the Catholics say you're stupid and superstitious, and basically dishonest, that's like being outwitted by George Bush.
I would be quite happy for some dumb evangelical type to explain this to 2.0 and 2.1. If they fall for junk like that I've failed as a father, and I think I have a good case for getting my school fees back.
I do vaguely worry about what Christians will do next though.
The big hole in their position isn't biology, it's history.
Most European history contains all sorts of things that rather undermine their position that they are the good guys sponsored by a loving God.
Pictures of priests blessing Nazi bombers, the various inquisitions, assorted holocausts, "St" Thomas More burning peple for a living, priests taking money to forgive sins, witch burning, faked miracles, and the bloody wars over minor bits of doctine, all rather look bad.
The Crusades are particularly hurtful to them. Here's a bit of trivia for you. Which was the first country attacked by the Crusaders out of England ?
was it
a) Egypt
b) Portugal
Yep, b).
Actually the various Moslem states were about the 5th place they attacked, unless you count pillaging the occasional small European town, when they drop out of the first 20.
Also history is a bad subject, even if you skip the rather inconvenient facts. It teaches us to work out how things may have happened, and to balance different accounts of events, and from tentative conclusions based upon evidence.
That blows a big hole in Christianity and to a lesser extent Judiasm. Many of ther events in the Old Testament are radically at variance with archeology. Not just the flood, but the plagues and wars that are supposed to have happened seem inconveniently not to be mentioned by the the people involved.
Fundamentalists can't even get past Genesis, since there are serious problems about where the 2nd woman came from, any ideas ?
Jesus is a tricky one. You can't prove he didn't exist of course, but for someone who is supposed to have done so many large things ,and to have been the epicentre of large scale public disorder, you'd think there would be some mention in the Roman records ?