Creationism is a Rational Belief System

In Genesis the list of creation is water over Earth, water seperated from water giving us sky, oceans and land appears up out of it. Next is vegetation, seeds, water "teems" with living creatures, living creatures on land, and finally man. And this is claimed to take six days, but then the Bible later declares time, as we declare time to be, as meaningless to God stating "A day is unto a thousand years as a thousand years is unto a day unto God." It's vague in reality, which I am grateful for because of the possible boredom attached to knowing how about everything, but also rational to say that this is not an account that shakes its fist at the Theory of Evolution. The theory, even if proven 100% true, is not a detractor of the Biblic Creation model as far as basic logic is concerned. Nevertheless, it is not 100% proven to be true. Nevertheless, I'll post a rebutal to Evolution and move on to prevent a pointless circular argument being put forth from myself. Evolution is still not good science or a consistant and dependable model, at least not in the present time, for making a finalized declaration for how our Earth history and the truth of the origin of life truely, within reason, in true truth, really and dependably, is. Thus, it is not a yet dependable source for declaring Creationism as illogical. Let us see what Darwin himself had to say on the matter. "Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory." (The Origin of Species) Here is a quote from "Almost Like a Whale" by Steven Jones. "The fossil record - in defiance of Darwin's whole idea of gradual change - often makes great leaps from one form to the next. Far from the display of intermediates to be expected from slow advance through natural selection many species appear without warning, persist in fixed form and disappear, leaving no descendants. Geology assuredly does not reveal any finely graduated organic chain, and this is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against the theory of evolution." (Almost Like a Whale, p. 252) The book references a long ridiculed statement by Charles Darwin. Darwin observed that a bear catching insects in its mouth, could evolve over time into a creature "almost like a whale". My opponent himself states that the Theory of Evolution is just that; a theory, so we are agreed on this. I'll now choose to move right along. Richard Dawkins is a world renknowned Atheist and the author of a book titled, "The God Delusion". He is also an Evolutionary Biologist. In the Atheist community, he is well respected, so much so that his net worth is $135 million due to book sells. www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/celeb/authors/richard-dawkins-net-worth/ In the following link Dawkins dances around the idea of God, but states that reality could be a simulation created by someone outside of our reality. Dawkins, the respected Atheist and Evolutionary Biologist, and undoubtedly of reasonably high intellect, is chewing on an idea that is not so far removed from the basic Creationist model; someone, somewhere beyond our reality, created it all, and it is hard to know how. Are Richard Dawkins and Creationists more alike than we had ever thought? Perhaps. http://youtu.be... And here is one where he says an advanced alien civilization may have "seeded" us here. http://youtu.be... So we could have been seeded here by someone much more advanced than us, and our reality may be a simulation or matrix created by some super programmer from outside our reality. Dawkins doesn't sound insane as I watch these videos. He seems to be thinking quite logically about the possibilities explained in these theories. I believe our reality was created by an outside being much mor advanced than us, and I am Creationist. If this were proven to be a created simulated reality, as Dawkins explains to us in the first video, wouldn't it be fair to say the theory would fall under... Creationism? Is Creationism really an illogical belief? I argue no, and I believe Dawkins doesn't really think so either. He is quoted to have said that he believed John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama are most likely Atheists, but there is a belief that one canmot be elected President in the United States by claiming Atheism. I often ask myself if Dawkins is showing his own hand by accident. I believe he is generally Agnostic but believes he has to oversell his "Atheism" to maintain his status in the Atheist community and allow himself to obtain $135 million in wealth. Is he stupid? I don't think so. And this intelligent Evolutionary Biologist author and businessman is hinting, in my opinion, at his somewhat Creationist views. Creationism is logical, reasonable, and most possibly 100% true in some way, shape, or form.