I'm not sure who you heard the "fossils already in the ground" thing from, but it's definitely not a representative viewpoint of most biblical creationists.

Right, I know that (and of course there's no point in me hashing over the flood arguments already presented at www.talkorigins.org ), but I was trying to make a different point.

Let me be more clear about the point I was trying to make...

Option 1: You can look at the universe from a purely scientific perspective, which is to try to discover the natural processes which formed the universe and the life around us, and to view these processes as the only important things worth knowing. These processes come from the basic laws of physics which are absolute. These laws don't change, although our understanding of these laws will change as we learn more and more about them.

Option 2: You can look at the universe from a purely theological perspective, which is to say that it was created by a supreme being, with everything created "in place" as we currently see it. He sends messengers in human form down to our planet every 500 years or so to make sure we're being good.

Option 3: You can take the half way point between 1 and 2, and say that a supreme being is subtly hiding his influence behind natural processes. The processes that we're observing aren't absolute, the will of a supreme being can bend these laws to suit his purposes similar to the way that Morpheus taught Neo to bend the laws of the Matrix.

Option 4: You can take the view that the natural laws that we observe in the universe, and the beginning of the universe itself, was created by a supreme being, but that he's just let everything roll from that beginning moment and is not altering the way things are going in realtime.

Although the creation-science people will deny it by trying to present flawed evidence, they're taking option 3. As are those who say that our evolution is being subtly "directed" by a supreme being. Both camps are saying the same thing, they're just saying it to different degrees. One camp is dead-set on finding tattered shreds of pseudo-scientific evidence proving the earth really was ...poof... created 6000 years ago and that the dinosaur fossils really are that young. The other camp is being a little looser about it and deferring to modern science with regard to the actual details of the age of our universe and its laws. But they're still hanging on to the idea that it's being "manipulated" and "observed" from outside and therefore prayer and worship are still important.

As far as I'm concerned, that's the same thing. Because from everything I've observed about how the world around me works, remotely-directing the evolution of a species without physically interacting with it would be just as much of an amazing feat as creating an entire planet in six days while fooling its inhabitants into thinking it's billions of years old. Both things would require an actual omnipotent God who was able to (for example) make things appear and disappear at will. And aside from illusionist's tricks and unconfirmed legends, we've not yet seen that kind of stuff happening. At least not in a way that gives us real evidence that it's there.

Arguing that an omnipotent God can hide his methods is, as far as I'm concerned, copping out of the argument. Because once you step over that line into "it's that way because God made it that way", you've just turned all points in the debate moot. Suddenly there is no way to prove or disprove anything. God can make evidence go poof if he wants. So there's nothing to argue about, no proof is good enough or bad enough to fight over. All you have left is (say it with me now)... faith.

Now, as far as option 4 is concerned... It's a no-op. If God isn't interacting with the universe and directing things in realtime, what's the point in worrying about him or giving him any thought? You can try to discover all the natural processes as in Option 1, but you're never going to find God that way because by definition, he's bigger and more powerful than the processes which govern our universe. And that concept becomes reducto ad absurdum anyhow, because you then have to ask yourself who created the creator.

Of course, to paraphrase Neil Peart, you can choose not to decide. But then you've still made a choice...