Faith writes:
"Science" even claims to "know" things that are nothing but outlandish interpretations of observed facts that are open to other interpretations. What you "know" is only that certain rocks you've very probably erroneously dated to 3.5 billion years ago contain no signs of life. That's ALL you know, that there is no hint of life in those particular rocks. The rest is sheer mental castle-building.
Science, done properly, is never wrong as far as we can tell. You mention "other" interpretations and I personally don't know enough to even hold court in these topics, but I am learning one thing from my own field of research on diet, diabetes, and health---There is usually a consensus on evidence---even if it is not acknowledged.
Why would the dating of rocks be erroneous? what other information do we have on the age of these rocks that can be applied to our discernment?
Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. —RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." —Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
"as long as chance rules, God is an anachronism."~Arthur Koestler
™ Version 4.2