I read the bible. I am a scientist. The simplest definition of science that I was taught in primary school is the one that has stuck in me:
science is finding out the truth about something.
I came to believe in God's because something about the explanation in science couldn't hold up: existence of a living thing by chance.(Do people still hold to this belief? Scientist shouldn't). Suppose a better explanation could be brought up could it weaken my belief? I see so much beauty, consistence and design in creation to just come into being by itself. What do I seek to find out? How did God create the earth? This will surely be known if not by me somebody will find out. He spoke words and things were. But how did they become from words(The process of changing nothing into something)? This is the question i ask as a scientist. Perhaps it could have been thoughts, conceived, planned, visualized and spoken into being as I would plan, write, run a computer program to automatically do something I want to do.
What do I want to say? Age of the earth. Is it multi-billion years ago or few thousands?
Formation of fossil fuels. And presence of fossil dinosaurs. Is there any other time in scientific history, archaeological history, biblical history when the conditions were so right?
I read the bible conditions required by scientific observations to me coincide with Noah's flood. 40 days and 40 night rain. 15 cubits water up covering the mountains. 150 days later the land is dry again.(Gen. 6).
This is why radio-dating could be wrong: Carbon-14. whatever happened seems to have affected carbon so much. The fossil fuel content is mainly Carbon and Hydrogen which confirms the possibility of mass death of carbon rich living things and abundant water reacting by whatever conditions probably heat which could account for the quick drying of the water. It seems undeniable that the conditions at that time affected the content of carbon in the fossils thereby making them seem as if they have decayed for a longer time than they actually have. Are fossils that old then?
Isochron dating. Something does not hold up:
comparing with meteorite radiation: meteorites may give different results taking into account the exposure to radiations and other conditions in space different from earth prior to their existence on earth;
determining the original content of radioactive isotopes: the half-life is usually thousands and milli0ns of years. The gradient of a curve seems to be constant when observed over a short range. In fact the dy/dx at a point is gradient of a tangent line. Exponential functions tend to change rapidly on one extreme and very slowly on the other extreme. how could we decide the change is constant? how long would it take for radioactivity to be low enough to allow the existence of first living things? What if the radio active content was actually already low at the beginning and we have projected it to be like "100%" uranium. That really wrongly projects it to billions of years before doesn't? If the radioactive decay is indeed constant, should there be existence of stable "decay products"? How do we determine the time these elements became stable? Is this accounted for in when dating?
The thing is we don't really know what really happened when first living things existed. We are all trying to find out the truth. Whatever we think might be right or wrong. If there is evidence things can't come into being on their own we search for what could have started everything. And I am sure there still isn't even now. An experiment was able to produce some protein. But did lightening strike the protein and produced a living cell? No body has ever produced a living cell from an experiment. if they will it will be a copy of a living cell that is already there. Does the fact that he is able to produce a copy of a cell prove that the cell existed on its own? Did the cells decide on their own to come together and be a human being? DNA-a series of instructions, a program that instructs the cell to be different from others and work together with other cells to makeup a human being. Did this program write itself? Somebody said the Bible said a woman was created from a rib and some fresh. What could be taken out of a man to create another DNA? some long strand of code. Moses saw this He thought ah, that a rib because probably it was taken from Adam's side where the ribs are.
One thing I find fault with experiments done in a controlled conditions. The results cannot always be as accurate as the way things really work in nature. Thats why we end up creating more problems with things we come up with.
What do I achieve anyway believing there is no God who loves me(John 3:16) who can give His only Son to die so I can have life? I may walk on my own but I eventually come to a dead end when everything in life doesn't add up and because I have disregarded so much that would have given me hope. It's all depression, hopelessness.
I wish you wouldn't always go by what the teacher marks right or wrong but what convinces you to be true. Investigate. Search. Read wide. If you never read the Bible give it a chance search through it whatever questions that have been bothering you. Read science, philosophy books find out what they are "really" saying. Usually reported speech is what distorts things. You will then stand confidently against what they say if you know their faults.
Surely you wouldn't be afraid to speak out to your teacher if he marks you wrong that the solar system has 8 planets now that you know will you?