I know not a single Catholic who believes the earth's age can be measured in thousands of years and man lived concurrently with the dinosaurs. Nor do I know a single Catholic whose references begin with Trent and go backwards. Hans Küng, of course, took issues with Vatican I and Vatican II, particularly on the Church's teaching on infallibility.

Obviously if you begin with the assumption that one teaching is as good as another, or that there is no teaching, that the Gospels are myths, that Jesus was unaware He was God (or wasn't divine), and so on then you can read pretty much whatever you want, just as you do.

But then why, with that wide field open, would you want to read such a boring self-important super-annuated tedious writer as Hans Küng?