You bet the Bible is right whenever there is a conflict. But that doesn't mean there aren't also scientific observations that accord with it. There are plenty.
My two cents worth: any amounts of evidence
FOR something are not enough to claim any validity.
There is lots of evidence available to your common senses for the earth to be flat and the center of the universe around which all else revolves.
What it comes down to is what evidence you need to
deny to maintain a {phylosophical\theoretical\belief} position -- and that the position that needs to deny the least amount of contra-indicating evidence is the most likely solution. This is the essence of unbiased scientific analysis.
On the otherhand any position that preconcludes that a {phylosophical\theoretical\belief} position is correct before the evidence is even considered (as Faith does here in the opening line) is the essence of biased unscientific dogma.
The denial of contra-indicating evidence is the better indicator of relative validity than any amount of positive evidence can ever overcome.
Enjoy.
Join the effort to unravel {AIDS\HIV} with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
™ Version 4.2
