But this is not the only possible view. If one approaches the text with the presupposition that it DOES square with reality (historical, geographical, and scientific), he will find that plausible theories exist which will accomodate all of the data (biblical as well as extra-biblical). To the critics, this will look like we are "making things up".
Making an interpretation fit the known facts (whether they be historical or scientific) is a relatively easy and wholly subjective exercise.
However making new facts of nature fit your interpretation is a much harder and better test of any theory.
Hence the reliance of science on prediction as the best means of evaluating theories.
It should be noted that science has made many verified predictions regarding the nature life the universe and everything. It is on these predictions that the foundtions of our current knowledge now lie.
Nobody has ever predicted anything, never mind anything specific and measuarable, using the bible that was not a subjective interpretation post the event in question.
Science has proven the bible wrong countless times but with the hindsight and knowledge of science and history it will always be possible to re-interpret biblical poetry such that it fits the known facts. This no more validates the bible than it does astrological mumbo jumbo published in the daily papers or the ramblings of Nostradamus.
Interpreting biblical poetry to fit scientific facts is effectively a recognition that the scientific method is the best means of investigating nature and that the bible and everything else rates as a very poor substitute for physical, objective and corroborated evidence that has predictiv reasoning at it's heart.
Stay happy