The only "evidence" you've given, using the term loosely, is "it seems so"
You have then, multiple times, talked about this huge mass of evidence, that either you've brought up, or is out there, but consistently, when asked, all you have is "it seems so". and claiming there's no argument against it. and shifting the burden of proof.
That is not evidence. nor an argument.
All I can take from this is there is no good argument for creationism, apart from pretending there is one, referencing it multiple times, but never actually giving it.
But the biggest problem, or at least difference between us is, your statement "a good argument from the onset, even without evidence outside of the concept"
shows you believe things are true, simply because you want them to be true.
I cannot do that. I want to believe things are true because they actually are true. I cannot simply "well, this feels good, I'll go with that"
Which is why I don't think we'll ever see eye to eye on this.
But, good chatting.