You referenced Genesis. Therefore, I am free to reference Genesis in my rebuttal.
Also, the argument that God should not be included in the discussion presupposes that God had no hand in creation. This is not a point any Christian is going to be willing to concede, because it is false.
Only if you take it to be 100% literal, which Catholics are not obliged to do. The genre of the creation account is historic allegory, relating ontological truth through poetic language. If you read it in the original Hebrew, the Genesis account of creation is quite clearly a poem.
I always love how people trying to refute the Bible take it much, much, more literalistically than believers.
The Bible is not a scientific textbook, it is the story of God’s love for humanity. The specific methods of creation, whether immediate or over the course of billions of years, is inconsequential to the question of human salvation, which is the primary focus of the texts. The Bible does not need to discuss the mechanics of creation, in part because the people to whom the OT was related would have had zero basis for understanding the complex mechanics of astrophysics and evolution. It’s just not important to the question of God’s sovereignty and human salvation.
Then it’s a good thing we’re not obligated to take it literalistically, despite what you seem to think. You are a creating a problem where none exists in order to fuel your faulty attempts to disprove God. This entire argument is a straw man because it is not based on what Catholics actually believe, but rather is founded on a caricature of Christians as a collective whole.
You’re the one choosing to create conflict where none exists. Don’t get upset when people poke holes in your argument.