It is unacceptable to conclude God did not understand enough science, or provide sufficient inspiration to the authors of Scripture. If such were the case, then God is not God, and unworthy of worship.
God is the God of extremes. He does not accept compromise. Remember what Christ told the Laodiceans in Revelation 3:
5 I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.
"It is unacceptable to conclude God did not understand enough science, or provide sufficient inspiration to the authors of Scripture."
God only inspired them to write what they needed to write to get His point across. He did not give them absolute knowledge. Jesus didn't have absolute knowledge of everything. He didn't know when the parousia would occur. He didn't know who touched his garments.
As regards natural science and the Bible, if we insist that the Bible, because it is divinely inspired, is literally true in every instance, then we crash into problems outside of Genesis. Jesus says the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. Of course it isn't. Error on his part.
Depends on how you look at it.
If you realize that he's talking to Jewish farmers in First Century Palestine, and using figures that they understood, the he wasn't in error: the mustard seed was the smallest seed they planted.
However, if one insists that, because God inspired the Bible and knows all things, that the Bible is literally, exactly right in every detail, then Jesus was greatly in error. There are many, many seeds in the world smaller than the mustard seed.
Me? I choose to read the text as Jesus addressing people using terms they understood. Likewise, I choose to see the inspired writer using the Sumerian/Babylonian creation legendarium, with its flood, its domed creation, its universal abyss of water, it's flood and ark - all of those things that really are not literally true in an historical, geological sense, in order to teach people that God created the world and man using forms they understood. Giving the ancients a lesson in superstring theory would not have illuminated anything. They would have been lost in the physics, and the POINT, that an intelligent God orchestrated it all, and watches still, would be lost too.
The mustard seed isn't the smallest seed. And the earth wasn't made in 6 days. And neither of these natural history errors of the Bible is an error in the sense of a flaw in the divine inspiration. God was not talking about that. That's not what was inspired. Jesus very probably didn't even know what an orchid seed was. He was not omniscient. He was a man, the son of Mary. He was also son of God. There were lots of things he didn't know about the natural world. And it didn't matter, because God Incarnate, extremely limited as he was by the flesh, was nevertheless God with perfect knowledge of the truth about the father and the moral law he taught. THAT is the part that is literally true. Mustard seeds and floods and apples and serpents? Their literal truth is not relevant. And insisting on the letter of the law loses the spirit entirely, by pitting the reason God gave us, and the knowledge imparted by the senses God gave us, against an old book that has Babylonian and Jewish fables in it.
The message is divinely inspired. The fables weren't.
God even tips us off, by giving us open contradictions in the text. All the birds were created at conflicting times. It matters. It matters because it's impossible for both to be right. God knew that when he inspired it. He's telling us, TODAY, that we DON'T HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT. He's given us the OUT of literal belief in Genesis, by making it absurd in parts. So that when our reason found science and can do the great act of forensics on the Shroud of Turin, and discovering even the inscriptions on the coins!, we have in our day proof that even modern science testifies to the resurrection! As it does to the healings at Lourdes. Science is in no sense at war with God or Jesus or true faith.
But if you must take every word of Genesis literally, or the Gospels literally, then you end up with faith-destroying errors, in syntax let alone facts. Birds couldn't have been created twice in time. The text conflicts. The mustard seed isn't the smallest seed. Jesus was wrong! Taken literally, yes. And yet we have the shroud and the healings, miracles indeed! Which means that we mustn't destroy the truth of the Bible by taking it literally where it must not be taken literally.
Jesus told us the inspired part of the Old Testament: Love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. That's the inspired part. If the rest of the words of the OT become tares and snares, if the letter kills faith because of the errors, then cling to what Jesus said it all means, and remember that the errors about birds don't speak to love of God or neighbor: they can be ignored. The OT is optional to read. Jesus summarized it. The whole Bible is optional to read. Jesus' message is the point. If you can't read you can still get the whole message. There isn't much of it.