So if someone has a book that they state was divinely inspired and/or authored, that should by definition trump observable reality? Or do you just think your own interpretation of your own divinely inspired and/or authored book has that position?
For example, if a Hindu holy text states that the earth sits atop an elephant, which stands atop a turtle, should India base its space program upon that belief rather than the observable data obtained through the scientific process?
You could call them liars, as you have, but that doesn’t mean they’re liars.
I've called no one a liar, I have simply requested that you not attempt to pass your own interpretation of your own holy text as being based upon observable facts or the scientific process.
Your position has nothing to go off except some rock in a lab that magically tell you how old they are.
You may have attended college, but its pretty clear you weren't paying attention in any of the relevant classes. Astronomy, cosmology, biology, archeology, and geology all cofirm that the earth and the univers are far, far older than a few thousand years. Do you dispute that?
“Do you dispute that?”
Yes, those sciences are incapable of proving what you assert.