Conservative Christians, does this statement bother you?

Science has been confirming the Bible for hundreds of years for the truth it contains, and thus, the validity of Christianity. Fact is there is no empirically supported scientific claim that in any way is in conflict with Christianity. What planet are you from? Why should it "bother" anyone that science confirms the truth of the Bible repeatedly? The Bible is true and science is true, and therefore each truly read, proves the truth of the other.

The same cannot be said for evolution, abiogenesis, or Big Bang. Does your quoted statement bother you and threaten your flimsy false belief of OPINION, that real observational science has nothing whatsoever to do with evolution or BB?

For anything to come under the umbrella of the scientific method, it must be observable, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable. The evolutionary model cannot be placed in this framework. For example, one cannot design an experiment to test evolutionary ideas.

You haven't even defined your terms, let alone asked a valid question. Does part truth count? What percent? By what authority method process or law do you define truth? Or are you responsible to truth and honor and integrity at all, or escaping responsibility to truth deluding yourself to verifiable truth (no absolutes)? In other words, you decide what truth is? What, because you can do Thumbs?

"Does it bother you" that Nelson Glueck a Jewish scientist, and universally esteemed as one of the greatest archaeologists, said that no archaeological discovery has ever contradicted the Bible? Sorta puts "science" to shame, don't it? A perfect irrefutable record of discovery in the past hundred years, ALL confirming the Bible, and you dispute this how?

Atheists have a lot of explaining to do. Your position is in jeopardy.

Addendum

Let's have a little "science" lesson, shall we, so we're all on the same page.

Empirical evidence is very simple:

1. Observable in nature OR

2. Experimentally demonstrable AND

3. Reproducible.

Failure to objectify the inferences being made and validating everything with secondary lines of evidence means the burden has not been met.. It's just that simple!

Biblical evidence of Creation and Noah’s Flood from Genesis qualifies as “observed” evidence, empirical evidence, by eyewitness account, either by verifiable persons (verifiable by the empirical evidence of the genealogy given all the way back to the first man, Adam) or the witness of God, Himself. These are the claims of the Bible made in real time, from The Beginning, handed down to Moses for inclusion in the P and for the inspiration and cohesion (consistency of message) for the rest of the Bible.

The idea that more primitive civilizations are further back in time is an evolutionary concept.

Moses said that Adam wrote a book. Adam was fully literate, probably highly intelligent as well; the first perfect Man. Moses was trained by Pharoah’s own guard to some day be King of Egypt. The people of Genesis were not “primitive” people. Adam’s descendants were making complex musical instruments, forging metal, and building cities—their tools, machines, and techniques were not “primitive.”

As the empirical, irrefutable empirical evidence of the Bible gives testimony to historical facts, and historical people in historical places, Adam and Moses were recording history in real time, given to us in the book of Genesis, literally.

Now, there’s a lot of confusion with the intellectuals about what a “day” is, or “yom” in Hebrew, as presented in Genesis. Tell us again, please, how this literal historical text written by literal historical people is not literal; explain how a day is not a 24 hour day, or how something came before The Beginning, literally. Try logically, or just use common sense.

If the Bible cannot stand on its own from the beginning, just forget the whole thing. If Christians can’t agree what the Bible says, why should atheists? Why the hell are you here if you don’t believe the words of the Bible? Just go away, because if you believe the Bible can’t stand on its own, you’re wasting your time. And so have many teens come to that conclusion, the Bible cannot be trusted, and left the church; another generation gone. All for the ignorance and stupidity of the atheist/humanist lie called evolution.

If you're confused what Genesis 1-11 "says", call any/all of the top ten universities in the world with Hebrew departments, they ALL AGREE what Genesis "says": 24 hour days, six day creation; Young Earth, literally.

If you don't believe what the Bible "says", if you don't believe the words, literally, your status of Christian is in jeopardy according to that same Bible. It is a sin to change what the Bible "says". Page 10 probably won't help you. You are on notice.

Those who assert Genesis is metaphorical really don't have much of a foundation for their faith and are akin to those building their house on sand. We do not worship or have faith in a metaphor.

Maybe the people that don't believe the Bible, but claim to, are the ones this question is addressed to? Who knows what delusions hold. Pride issues? What, you believe in your intelligence over God's Word? Oops. I thought we went through this with "Science"? Remember empirical evidence?

Fact is there is no empirically supported scientific claim that in any way is in conflict with Christianity. The same cannot be said for evolution, abiogenesis, or Big Bang. Yet some people want to believe OPINION over the truth of the Bible? These are not legitimately truthful or honest people; they delude themselves by ignoring verifiable evidence.

I'm not aware of ANY instance, where the Bible DOES touch on science, that it has been proven incorrect. How can anyone DENY the evidence of the Bible and the scoreboard, when science corrects itself (proven incorrect?) almost daily? LITTERALLY!

Unfortunately for you and him, many well accepted scientific principles over the ages have later been proven wrong. Unlike faith in God which can never be wrong.

Huh! Just like God. What are the odds?

Christians don’t deny science, they deny bad science. It’s not religion vs science, but good science vs bad science. Christians don’t deny the evidence, they deny the atheist’s “interpretation” of the evidence.

It doesn't bother me. But it's not accurate either. Science once told us that Pluto was a planet. It once told us that margarine is healthier than butter. There are many more things that science thought was true.

As a matter of fact, real scientists tell us that you cannot say any theory is completely true with 100% certainty. Science is a perennial academic exercise. It's job is to learn, and keep on learning. It is neither true nor false.

No. Science is already an explanation on how the universe actually works. To deny it would be like denying the existence of how the human body functions and the seasons and winds, which are also explained accurately with science.

Whatever is true is true whether you believe or realize it. However it is not always at all clear what actually is true. Science does not claim to deliver truth but only constructs models of the world that are validated through the evidence of testing. Religion has no claim to truth whatsoever as it is just ancient mythology.

That is very true.

And as you see, it bothers them plenty.

Gods precise use of science and math created all things.

All can see Mans misuse of science and math. The AIR--LAND--WATER all polluted--Huge hole in ozone layer causing havoc weather all over the earth. Getting sued for bad drug after bad drugs they sell to us, not to mention the cancer they are selling us as well.

It's a pretty vague comment. Plenty of science that was believed to be true at one point, later turned out to be incorrect.