The argument that the order in which life has arisen on earth is detailed in the days of genesis account of creation puzzles me for a number of reasons.
1. It is often lovingly deployed by the same young earth creationists who don't believe in the truth of the scientific dating techniques that have established the order in the first place. (This may or may not apply to you dance-above)
2. The genesis account makes no mention of dinosaurs, marsupials, bacteria, viruses, or any other type of life that you wouldn't expect a middle-eastern cleric to know about.
3. The genesis account actually gives a horribly incorrect order. Take, for example, grass. Grass only evolved at the end of the Mesozoic Era, 65 million years ago (MYA). The biblical account introduces grass on the third day, before any animals had yet been created.
The problem here is obvious - the genesis order does not stack up against the evolutionary account. Creationists will retreat to the position that the dating of the fossil record is wrong and there are obviously many reasons for why this claim is bogus. My favourite though has to do with grass again. because grass evolved on relatively recently (65MYA as I said above) it is not found in any of the fossil layers from before that time. Which means with none of the more than 70% of all species that lived before 65mya either. Creationists (who usually believe that fossil layers were laid down during "the flood") now have to explain how not one single blade of grass managed to be fossilised in the lowers layers. They often claim for animals (like horses etc.) that they ALL avoided being fossilised in lower levels because they ALL ran to higher ground and were covered by mud and silt there. This excuse doesn't work for grass since grass can't run away