My first though is that Hawking and Mlodinow should stick to physics and leave the philosphising to people with more time on their hands.
But it boils down to either trusting our sense (and measuring equipment) or not.
If you don't trust radiometric dating then you are free to beleive what you like about the age of Earth. But if you trust our intruments you can't logically draw the conclusion that Earth is but 6k years old.
A model 'model' reality so the more of reality it 'models' the more real it is.
Genesis does not model reality at all and the Big Bang model (at this point) seems to do an ok (not perfect) job.
Seems to me that more accurate is better than less accurate. Nearly real is better than not real.
You don't need to beleive in evolution, you can read about it happening in the appropriate journal and given the right education and equipment you could duplicate the research.
Try duplicating Genesis.
Edited by Larni, : spellink
Edited by Larni, : x2
™ Version 4.2
(1)
