We are often told by Christians that the Bible is not a science book. By atheists, we are told that the Bible makes too many erroneous scientific claims, enough to prove it didn't come from God. By crackpots, we are told that it is scientifically perfect, to the point of being an excellent guide to science. By liberals, we are told that it has absolutely nothing to say about science, and so we shouldn't allow them to overlap. There are so many views about the scientific nature of the Bible, it's often difficult to figure out what the correct view is.
In reality, all of those views contain a measure of truth. The Bible does make some claims that pertain to science. However, science is not its purpose. Everything the Bible says, be it a scientific claim, a historical claim, a theological claim, a philosophical claim, any kind of claim you find in the Bible, is designed to help mankind relate to our Creator, not help us know everything about the creation.
This is why the Bible says things like "the heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork". In a sense, the world can be seen as a second Bible. Philosophers distinguish between what is called a "special" revelation and a "general" revelation. Special revelation would include direct encounters with God, or Scriptures that record His word. General revelation, by contrast, is available to all mankind, regardless of religious affiliation (though of course, it should be noted, that nature is significantly more open to interpretation).
The world we inhabit just screams "there is a God". Not only does it scream it, but Romans 1:20 tells us that God's invisible attributes, namely His eternal power and Godhead, are so clearly seen through creation that mankind has no excuse. If you don't have a Bible, you still know there's a God, and you can still know quite a bit about Him.
Thus, there is an overlap between science and Scripture. The primary purpose of Scripture is not to be a science book. That is why it speaks generally, and with normal figures of speech, not with pinpoint accuracy. That is why, while there are scientific anachronisms in the Bible, they are not so extreme that one could reasonably expect to be able to use it as an instruction book for making a TV, landing a rocket on Mars, or curing cancer. The Bible and science overlap, but they were never supposed to be synonyms. It is illogical to say there is no science in the Bible, because that claim can be disproven just by reading it. It is illogical to say the Bible makes multiple scientific errors, because it was never supposed to make perfectly accurate scientific claims. It is illogical to say the Bible is scientifically perfect, because again, it was never supposed to be. All three views contain some of the truth, but all fall short.