An anonymous student (I assume) subscribed me to to the Good News newsletter, presumably to save my soul or to annoy me. Luckily I love reading this kind of material! This isn't directly creationist, but is representative of a tactic I have encountered before.
Well the Jan-Feb issue has a article in their "God, Science, and the Bible" section about the recent discovery of Philistine temples in Israel that confirm the story of Samson (or at least demonstrate it is an accurate desciption of such temples). I have no issue with biblical archaeology, in fact it is an interesting area.
However, the flaw they use here is to claim a 'recent' (1974??!!) discovery proved scoffers wrong. Apparently scoffers proved that Samson was a myth because no Middle Eastern temples used columns. This 'recent' discovery of two Philistine temples with columns.
Now, where are the scoffers who claimed this? Would a historian have to rely on presumed architectural design to disbelieve a story about a man with magic super-strength in his hair? It is the same argument that claims that historians doubted the Noah story because it predated ship-building, but the discovery of ancient ships proved Noah right.
Anyhow, it is an argument of supreme misdirection. In the creationist realm I remember Hovind claiming that a scientific prediction of creationism is fossils buried in multiple layers (as a similar argument to above). The implication is that evolution would not predict this so the 'subsequent' discovery of such layers is a fatal flaw to the theory.
Doctor Bashir: "Of all the stories you told me, which were true and which weren't?"
Elim Garak: "My dear Doctor, they're all true"
Doctor Bashir: "Even the lies?"
Elim Garak: "Especially the lies"