If A we should be aware at all times that our human understanding of the words of the Bible may be flawed, and that clear physical evidence trumps possibly poorly understood divine revelation. Lest we fall into the error of the Catholic Church WRT geo-centrism. At one time it was felt that the words of the Bible were quite sufficient to refute helio-centrism. The argument posed was essentially the same one that you supply above.
Now we know better, and read the relevant passages without requiring the earth to be stationary. Likewise few readers blink at passages describing "Stars falling to earth", yet science tells us that stars are giant fusing balls of gas inconceivably far away. To suggest that the stars were suns like our own, that might have their own planets was considered heresy, punishable by burning at the stake. Would you keep science "inferior" to Biblical revelation WRT those passages too?
Good points. No, I am not suggesting flawed interpretations of the Bible should be propped up. There is much that can be learned from studying God's creation, AND how to "rightly divide the word of truth." The church has made mistakes and errors, as have scientists and scientific establishments.
Do you accept the Bible as divine revelation, and, if so, what does it say to you that you can "believe?"