Actually, that's not what "most Christian" churches teach, if by "most Christians" you include Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Mainline Protestants -- which add up to around 85% of all the world's Christians.
Those churches all teach there is no conflict between science and Genesis, if Genesis is understood as a remarkably accurate representation recorded by people who had zero, zip, nada knowledge of actual science.
Remember, the purpose of Genesis is not to explain the world scientifically, but rather to illustrate imperfect mankind's relationship to Almighty God.
This relationship does not change regardless if we understand it through Genesis, or even through a scientific perspective.
ravenwolf: "...i don,t put much stock in every thing that is called science."
There is no law requiring anyone to believe any scientific theory or hypothesis.
And you can base your rejections on whatever criteria you chose.
But if you chose your particular interpretation of the Bible as a basis for rejecting some scientific theory, then you should at least have the common decency not to pretend your ideas are somehow more "scientific" than science.
Unlike many people, i believe there being two or two parts of the creation because the Bible appears to be describing that
I realize that lots of Church denominations are now going along with science because science is of the world, not because they read it in the bible.
And the more i read from people who are pretending to be scientists the less stock i put in it.