Here are some things a little meatier from someone with a degree in physics from the University of Chicago.
The title of the article is "Genesis and Science ARE Compatible!"
http://www.mb-soft.com/public/genesis5.html
I scrolled down to the verses on Genesis.
Gen. 1:1 - In the beginning God created heaven and earth
An introductory statement, which precedes the rest of Genesis 1.
I see! It's an introductory statement (akin to "Once upon a time"). So we have to ignore that this doesn't match with BB theory since it mentions the Earth too early.
Disappointing. I was expecting to be informed that the Earth was indeed created at the moment of the Big Bang -- just that it's constituent joules of energy were not collected in a form anyone would recognise as the Earth.
This might also be a vague reference to a Big Bang event to begin the existence of the Universe, for when scientists would eventually become capable of comprehending the possibility of such things.
A vague reference. Mmmm.
Gen. 1:2
This is a reference to the fact that there was no form or light or anything else. Most Big Bang theories suggest that there was a brief period that occurred before matter could exist.
The verse seems to be missing:
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
Another reference to the Earth. And to waters.
The earth being formless could certainly be what I described above. But empty? You only describe something as empty if it can hold things.
Then comes verse 3:
God said 'Let there be light', and there was light.
This might be a reference to the creation of the multitude of stars in the Universe. Modern science would place this as beginning from a few million years after the Big Bang essentially through the present. Many stars (and therefore many sources of subdued light) existed by 6 billion years ago.
Logically, this seems to be a peculiar first item to create, if you think about it. Ancient people would probably expected ground or people to have been created first, then the other stuff. In ancient times, the sequence of Genesis events must have seemed very strange. Why plants before animals? Why water before plants? Why fishes before land creatures? Why light first?
Err, no. Water before light. Genesis clearly states that there was water before there was light.
Animals need to eat. They either eat other animals or they eat plants. I would have guessed that plants preceed animals. sim: Animals and plants need water. And plants need light, too. It would have been a bit silly to create them before light.
From a scientific perspective, a LOT happened here. Early on, ONLY the element Hydrogen existed, the very simplest of all atoms. Gravitation caused clouds of this Hydrogen to collect in large balls. When a ball got extremely large, the weight of all the overlying Hydrogen squeezed and heated the Hydrogen at the very center.
He's talking about stars.
Has he overlooked primordial nucleosynthesis?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_nucleosynthesis
That's as much as I can manage for now. I was hoping to see where the first appearance of woman fits with the scientific version. Adam names the animals before he has even seen a female of his own species.
