Courage of (anti-science) Conviction - Really?

I have to vent!  Maybe it's because I'm a scientist, and maybe because I'm passionate about science literacy and education.  Do we really need to admire people who "stick by their guns" when their "guns" are refusing to believe one of the basic principles of our environment?

Here's what happened: I work in Earth and space science education and public outreach and we recently had to replace one of our podcast narrators (contractor, not an employee of our org.) on the basis that she refused to say in a podcast that the Moon is 4.5 billion years old because it's against her religion.  One of my co-workers said, "Wow, you have to admire her courage of conviction."  Maybe it wasn't appropriate, but I scoffed just about as loudly as I could.  "That's not admirable," I said, "that's just being a stubborn fool."  My point is that when it comes to something that has been physically proven and is now a fact in science, like the age of our Moon,  there's no room for  "conviction".  What is courageous or admirable about covering your ears and not wanting to believe a scientifically proven fact?  Also, what's even weaker, in my opinion, is to try and cover it up with a religious belief.  As far as I know, there is not a religion out there that advises its followers to not believe things that are real and are a physical part of our environment.  I understand sticking by an opinion or a belief -  but the age of the Moon is neither, and it's unfortunate that we are now excusing people who are willfully scientifically illiterate by saying that they are just true to their beliefs.  SCOFF!!!

Trying to be diplomatic, one of my lunar scientist peers said, "Well, we won't be able to change her mind."  True - but admire her, I certainly will not.