Which could be a good argument that the Bible isn't incompatible with science as some feel it is. And that believing in the Bible isn't as likely to lead us back into superstition and the Dark Ages as some would also have us believe. Christians are not the anti-science Luddites as often portrayed. The primary area of disagreement here is on origins and the interpretation of the fossil record.
The Bible also addresses several topics which have been confirmed by science, which the ancients would have had no way of knowing about. Some of them are the water cycle, that winds form a circulating system, the life is in the blood, there are oceans currents in the sea, to name a few. It gives credibility to the concept that the Bible IS divinely inspired when things are mentioned that they people of that age would have no way of knowing by themselves.
Surely it doesn't require revelation to notice that animals can bleed to death.
I have no doubt at all that the Phoenicians, Greeks, and other seafareres knew about currents.
There are people opposed to science all over the religious spectrum - many Christian, many atheist, many everywhere in between. No argument from me there. On my (short) homepage I point out that spirituality and science are both of importance to the future of our nation and all of humanity, and I seriously mean it.
The primary area of disagreement here is on origins and the interpretation of the fossil record.
It goes much further than that, though. I've always believed that the fossil evidence is given disproportionate attention here, for one. It makes a strong case for evolution, but certainly not the only one. I might not be totally convinced myself if this was the only line of supporting evidence. The genetic evidence is much stronger (but harder to understand to most people, myself included). Biogeography (i.e. where related types of life are found) is also of paramount importance. Add shared morphologies, vestigial organs, observed cases of speciation, ring species, etc. - one can explain away any one or two of these, but all these different and varied supporting points? If evolution didn't occur, it sure seems the Creator went through some great pains to make it appear so. The mere "coincidence" that all these lines of inquiry yield the same picture is what lends so much confidence to the theory - not just one of 'many possible interpretations' of the fossil record.
The Bible also addresses several topics which have been confirmed by science, which the ancients would have had no way of knowing about.
I don't know that that's true, but it's irrelevant as to its authority in spiritual matters, anyway. I don't think accurate science is the point or reason for the Bible. The Bible's credibility comes from the practice of applying its principles and messages in our personal lives and the spiritual strength it gives.