I don't think that correcting the idea of the earth being 6,000 years old is irrelevant to the statement. Because that assumes that evolution didn't happen, and that humans didn't evolve to be smarter over time. Which is what led to more and more advanced in fields such as technology. Saying we survived 6,000 years without AI assumes that we've been the same intelligence throughout that time and have also only endured several thousands of years of life vs the actual millions of years between the first humans and now. A lot less happens in thousands vs millions of years. Millions of years is a long time for people to recognize issues that happened in history and to try to fix them with AI/technology.
Someone isn't necessarily problematic for holding beliefs they do. But that also doesn't mean that you can't find their beliefs misguided and want to question them. Creationism denies a lot of science which in general can be problematic, even if an individual isn't.
There are people I love who hold beliefs that have evidence to the contrary, and I will point that out to them sometimes if the topic is brought up. That doesn't make me like them less. I don't think it's being mean necessarily to point out logic that is flawed when Chevy made a specific statement bringing up his beliefs, rather than using generalized language. If someone purports a belief like that it is still spreading that idea even if that wasn't the main point of their statement. Chevy and others have brought up their religious beliefs in other ways that were solely about just faith and no one took issue those times. So it's not about faith as much as it is challenging a certain viewpoint that is inconsistent with tons of evidence. If someone thought the earth was 6,000 years old because of a book they read that wasn't the Bible, and they didn't believe in god, I would still see questioning their belief as a non-issue. In this instance it just so happens that religion ties into history/geology/archeology/etc.
Someone isn't necessarily problematic for holding beliefs they do. But that also doesn't mean that you can't find their beliefs misguided and want to question them. Creationism denies a lot of science which in general can be problematic, even if an individual isn't.
There are people I love who hold beliefs that have evidence to the contrary, and I will point that out to them sometimes if the topic is brought up. That doesn't make me like them less. I don't think it's being mean necessarily to point out logic that is flawed when Chevy made a specific statement bringing up his beliefs, rather than using generalized language. If someone purports a belief like that it is still spreading that idea even if that wasn't the main point of their statement. Chevy and others have brought up their religious beliefs in other ways that were solely about just faith and no one took issue those times. So it's not about faith as much as it is challenging a certain viewpoint that is inconsistent with tons of evidence. If someone thought the earth was 6,000 years old because of a book they read that wasn't the Bible, and they didn't believe in god, I would still see questioning their belief as a non-issue. In this instance it just so happens that religion ties into history/geology/archeology/etc.