Pete- As I have said before, what creationists use as "bottom line" is essentially, basically different in kind and structure & method from what science uses. They use two entirely different concepts of knowledge.
Yes, science has a 'bottom line', but it is that more data & evidence is always useful and must be tested & integrated before being provisionally accepted.
Creationists bottom line is, as they say, and you agree, belief in a particular scriptural view.
If you cannot see the basic incongruity in deciding what the 'truth' will be before...or instead of... getting relevant data, I don't know what to say.
It is really rather an insult to honest scientists to suggest that their methodology is 'merely' one form of belief.... and I don't toss out words like 'insult' randomly. As I have said before, using 'belief' that way is an unfair twisting of language & definitions.