The reverse is also true, true interpretations of scripture cannot be in conflict with true science. Some people interpreted scripture to say that the earth was static and the sun moved round it. Their interpretation of scripture was wrong, as was shown by the science.
If God made the world, then the world is as much from God as the Bible.
No, there’s no bias. And I doubt the two men were saying different things, just putting the emphasis on different places. To be blunt, there is no such thing as a complete scientific theory. To criticize evolution for being incomplete without mentioning that every other single theory, due to the provisional nature of science, is also incomplete, is to demonstrate an actual bias.
Is a little like asking if I had sexual relations with my wife’s birthday and phone number.
It hasn’t. I’m sorry, but what you just wrote in that bottom part of your post is gibberish. A word salad that is literally content and concept free. You don’t like evolution, fine, but please don’t misrepresent science to make your case.
When you’re intent was to write gibberish, trying to assert a clearly ridiculous claim that somehow scientists don’t accept evolution any more, that’s what you get. I think we both know what you’re saying is nonsense. There is no serious challenge to evolutionary theory. There is continuous refinement, but that’s true of all theories.
Why do you continue to repeat this incorrect statement. Lenski’s experiment is up to 50,000 generations by now. Obvious errors like this are very unlikely to convince anyone.
You well know what he meant. He meant past generations and not the experiment. Quit the BS already.
If you want it to be true, it very much is. It’s almost common sense.