The article linked wikicreation and there is also The Creationist Museum website.

To be honest though it is a fairly dead end debate. Creationist tend to find one small piece of information take it out of context and lock onto it. Out of curiosity I have looked at some of their evidence at the majority is either really bad science or misstating other scientist. They do have some interesting theories about conditions in a pre-flood world but you can the same sort of thing in a good scfi book. I watched a video where they were excavating dinosaur tracks and finding human tracks next to them. The problem is that even though I am not a trained paleontologist I am pretty sure you would do such excavations with a bulldozer as they were.

I t does get more interesting though once you get beyond the young earth crowd. Evolution can't work with half a system and every step in the process has to be sustainable and an advantage of the previous step. Evolution very rarely creates new things but instead modifies old things. Evolution is more of a result then a process.

For a snake to bite and poison you it needs four things. Retractable hollow fangs, toxin, glands to pump toxin and the hard wiring in their instinct driven brain to use it the toxins. None of them are of any use without the others and all four them developing in a usable form at once defies reason.

The reality is there is a lot more we don’t understand about evolution then we do understand the fossil record is hard to read and very incomplete in places. I know that in just my life there have been dramatic changes in what we think happened and they were just as sure then as they are now that they were right.