Are Creationists shooting themselves in the foot?

I liked that site about the creationist foot shot. Well, sort of. The creationist responses were sad. The next response by nuggin doesn't attack the creationists but the Bible.
There are three possibilities, Moses was a rip off of earlier Myths, the other myths were a rip off of the Biblical stories, or that the Bible contains references to other beliefs in order to communicate in ways that the people understand and to tell people to not worship that way. I would not be surprised at all to see clear correlations to the book of the dead in the Torah. Much of the first five books is meant to turn people away from Egyptian worship. I can show you many more correlations, but that doesn't tell you why they were there. Lamark quoted much good science and then came to bad conclusions. That doesn't mean all science is wrong. Creationists quote the Bible but then come to some conclusions that I can't agree with. That doesn't necessarily mean that the Bible is wrong. to Conclude that Moses was fictional, you have to show that my other two possibilities are wrong (They ripped off the Bible, or the Bible used what people knew to teach theological truths in a way they could understand.) By the way, you would do much better to correlate Sargon to Nimrod. Moses fits much better into 1400s Egypt. Even to correlate the name Moses with names like Ahmoses, Thutmoses, etc.
Again, I can see the creationists shooting themselves in the foot without that making a statement about the Bible being right or wrong, just like Lamark and other scientists have been spectacularly wrong without discrediting science.