struggler, while I agree that it's vitally important to have the most up to date information, I must point out that the amount of knowledge in the world does not double every two years. There is no real way to quantify "knowledge", but what we do know is that the amount of data in the world is doubling every two years, which was shown in the IDC Digital Universe study a few years ago.
Unfortunately the description of "data" in this instance includes (for example) things such as millions of copies on the internet of the same picture of a cat wanting a cheeseburger, and millions of copies of Avatar on bluray.
What I can say, however, is that while knowledge can't be assigned a "quantity", we can assign quality to the things we believe. For me, the quality of the knowledge of our beliefs is based on the evidence supporting it. The age of a scientific article certainly comes into play in that context, but even if there is one old study suggesting one idea, and several newer suggesting the opposite, I'll side with the most compelling evidence and data, regardless of the age of the articles, until such a time as someone provides me evidence as to why I should not. In the case of the bible, you have a very old document with no evidence at all, being contradicted by every known fact about the universe, so this is clearly a non-issue.
Regarding the 50 names, I want to point out that writing a long list of people who agree with an opinion does not validate an argument unless you can show that they represent a majority vote, or that there is sufficient evidence supporting them. A good example of this, and why consensus matters in the face of misinformation, is Project Steve.
Project Steve was the result of a religious organisation made a list of scientists who, for lack of a better description, did not believe in evolution. The group sought out these scientists, and placed them in a list, amassing hundreds of names. Unfortunately, the US National Centre for Science Education decided to make their own list of scientists, who disagreed, and supported Darwin's theory of evolution.
But when they did this, they decided to prove a point, wanting to display the overwhelming consensus among scientists in support of the theory of evolution. So, they decided to create a list of scientists who support the theory of evolution... but to only accept scientists with the name Steve.
