Is it interesting to you that people who fully affirm the existence of miracles in the face of no scientific supporting evidence deny the possibility of a direct, recent creation that actually has scientific evidence in support of it?
These would say, "We must deny young earth creationism because all the science points away from it." Yet they do not say, "We must deny the resurrection because all the science points away from it."
That seems like selective hermeneutics to me. Somehow we are less embarrassed to believe a dead man rose from the dead than we are to believe that God created the world in six day relatively recently.
The truth is that there is far more scientific evidence for a recent creation than there is for a resurrection.
Perhaps some people should rethink their belief in the supernatural and the implications of that for their belief in the text of Scripture.