I'll jump in here if you don't mind.
There seem to be two ways that this is dismissed by creationists:
1) (this is obvioulsy frought with theological issues but it is still used now and then)
God made it look that way. He faked the whole thing by starting the light already part way here. He faked age by making everything look that way.
This one is obviously not something that can be considered to be creation "science" and it's pretty bad theology as well.
2) The speed of light is not a constant.
There is, of course, no evidence for this in the way that creationists try to use it. In addtion, the direct measurements of SN1987A produce results that demonstrate that light and the rest of physics has behaved as now for the last 170,000 years. I have yet to see a counter argument to the SN1987A measurements.
3) All the measurements of age are wrong.
And, not only that, they are somehow magically wrong in a way that allows independent agreement between a bunch of different dating methods. The various reasons why they are wrong are given as arm waving speculations without being completely thought out. In other cases the reasons are spurious. For example arguing that physical conditions can affect decay rates but neglecting to note that those conditions can not pertain to the earth.
™ Version 4.2