Conflicts Between The Bible and Science

Some seem to consider science's observations and conclusions to be more precise and irrefutable than they might deserve. Apparently, however, despite the care that science seems suggested to take in studying and informing regarding the state of reality, science seems subject to human fallibility, misinterpretation and/or misapplication of observation, and resulting false conclusions that seem to suggest that the Bible's suggestions.

• Estimating Earth's Age
  Apparently, an important point of disagreement between those who advocate the Bible and those who advocate science seems to be the age of the earth.
  Science seems to suggest 4.5 billion years old (http://www.universetoday.com/75805/how-old-is-the-earth), whereas many seem to interpret the Bible as suggesting 6,000 years. I use the word "interpret" since the Bible seems to not explicitly suggest a specific earth age (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2007/05/30/how-old-is-earth).
  I seem to have avoided taking a position on the issue based upon the grounds that both earth age estimates seem to be exactly that: estimates that are subject to error. Science's earth age estimation seems to be reasonably comparable to radar gun history.

  Radar technology seems to be suggested to have emerged as soon as the 1940s. Apparently, however, in 1979, perhaps 40 years later, a radar gun seems to have clocked a palm tree at 86 mph and a house at 28 mph (http://www.talkinglawtv.com/radarerrors.html).

  One important point seems to be that, after perhaps nearly 40 years of the technology's use (and perhaps) development, such a dramatic error by the technology occurred. A second important point seems to be that, perhaps the error was detected because evaluators had an alternative means of evaluation: sight. They know that, at least for the major part of human observation, unless transported, palm trees and houses typically don't travel at all, much less at the rate of speed suggested to have been reported by the radar guns.
  We might not have the same comparative point of reference for earth age since not many seem to claim to have been around to see the earth become established. Consequently, perhaps the 4.5 billion year estimate, although possibly based upon partially understood phenomena, might be as inaccurate as the technology that suggested that a palm tree might be due a speeding ticket.

• Human Technology In Noah's Time And The Ark's Technology
  Some seem to suggest that human technology at the time of Noah's flood was insufficient to build Noah's Ark.
  Without addressing at this point whether the Noah's Ark account is historical fact, the point seems importantly made that estimations of the previous state of the human experience and, as a result, the feasibility of Biblical suggestions, might be similarly subject to error. Substantiation of this point seems to include http://listverse.com/2013/04/12/10-mysteries-that-hint-at-forgotten-advanced-civilizations

• Stars And The Six-Day Creation
  Genesis 1 seems to describe God's creation of the earth, its inhabitants, and their humanly-observable surroundings. Some seem to suggest a logic conflict in Genesis 1:16's apparent description of the sun's, moon's and stars' creation. Genesis 1:19 seems to follow that description with the suggestion "And the evening and the morning were the fourth day".
  Apparently, "The nearest stars to Earth are in the Alpha Centauri triple-star system, about 4.37 light-years away", per http://www.space.com/18964-the-nearest-stars-to-earth-infographic.html. The suggested conflict seems to be that the light from stars other than the sun would not have reached Earth for 4.37 years, rather than by the sixth day when humankind seems Biblically suggested to have been created (Genesis 1:26-31).
  Without suggesting authoritative knowledge thereregarding, this suggested conflict seems to make multiple assumptions that *seem* possibly unintended by the Biblical text.
  • Alpha Centauri was closest to Earth at creation.
    Science seems to suggest to me that stars potentially collapse. A reasonable possibility seems to be that one or more stars existed within the range necessary for their light to reach earth within the two remaining days before humans are Biblically-suggested to have been created.
  
  
  • Sun, moon, and stars were created on the same day.
    Sun, moon and stars seem to be mentioned in the "fourth day" creation passage (Genesis 1:14-19), and the passage seems reasonably interpreted as suggesting that stars were created on the fourth day, along with sun and moon. However, to me, Genesis 1's construction and wording seem to (possibly) render Genesis 1:16's mention of the stars even more reasonably interpreted as an afterthought, explicitly establishing God's responsibility for the existence of stars, rather than explicitly specifying their creation on the fourth day.
    To explain, Genesis 1:3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 18, 21, 24, 26, 28, and 30 all seem to contain a colon, apparently separating a major statement before the colon from an (apparently) somewhat parenthetical statement after the colon.
    In all verses except 16, 26, and 28, the parenthetical statement seems to be suggest either that "it was so" or that "it was good", apparently reasonably interpreted as an important addendum that "rounds out" (for current lack of a better term) the major statement. In verses 26 and 28, the addendum seems to consist of a clarification the human role on the earth, relative to other life forms.
    To me, every verse in the fourth-day creation passage (Genesis 1:14-19) seems to focus on the two major lights: day (sun) and night (moon), apparently quickly mentioning the stars after a colon in verse 16, which seems to address the sun's and moon's actual establishment. To me, this seems reasonably interpreted as suggesting that the stars mentioned after the colon might have existed prior to Genesis 1, as part of creation that might God might have undertaken throughout infinite past apparently suggested by science's Laws Of Conservation Of Energy and Mass (Substantiation: God's Existence). Perhaps something about the state of the region prior to Genesis 1:3 prevented energy from existing as light. Perhaps, it is for this reason that the Bible seems to describe God as explicitly establishing light as a presence in Genesis 1:3. Perhaps that which God seems Biblically suggested to have done to facilitate light might have allowed light from preexisting stars to exist in the region.