Fundamentalist apologists have explained why such data is not a problem. It's called, "Appearance of Age".
This is because the world today is not as it was in creation. God's creative powers are at rest now, and He is maintaining the creation using present laws of physics. The original created world, perfect and non-decaying at first, was subsequently cursed and made subject to decay and death (Genesis 3:17; Romans 8:20, etc.). Furthermore, even that world was destroyed by the Flood of Noah, so that the world we live in today is a relic of destructive processes, not creative processes. Any effort to apply present processes and process rates to creation is doomed to failure.
It is claimed by old-universe advocates that Romans 1:20 reveals that truth about creation and God's character must be "clearly seen" from the study of the creation. Any unregenerate scientist, using valid theory and careful analysis, must be able to determine the age and origin of any object. Since secular scientists have concluded the universe began with a Big Bang, that must be the way it happened. God could not have created with the appearance of a Big Bang if He didn't use that method, so that must be the way He did it. After all, God cannot lie!
But this position denies the clear Scriptural teachings regarding Creation, the Fall, and the Flood. Furthermore, it denies the very possibility of creation, for creation without the appearance of "age" is impossible.
God, in His sovereignty, knew that fallen man, living in the post-Flood world might wrongly conclude the age and origin of things. For just that reason, He gave us a clear record of what He had done and when He had done it. Furthermore, when we look at the evidence in light of what He has told us, the universe doesn't even look old. The real evidence is fully compatible with an origin only thousands of years ago.
On the other hand, if fallen scientists extrapolating present process are right and the universe is old, then God has lied to us, for He clearly said He created all things in six days, not too long ago.
(In case anyone is wondering, I regard this theory as anti-intellectual hogwash.)