Biblical errors: why Genesis is not just wrong, but hopelessly wrong

Defenders of Genesis like to make the case that it's not wrong, just not to be taken literally.  Sure, the world could not have been created in 6 days (not 7 - god allegedly rested on the 7th), but who is to say those are really "days"? Maybe they were epochs or billions of years or whatever.
The problem is that the order is impossibly mixed up.  Also, biblical authors were not content at leaving it at that.  Perhaps in an attempt to impress a superstitious, agrarian audience who could never imagine that we would one day be able to prove or disprove their claims, they fabricated gratuitously.
Genesis I and II, for example, can't both be true.
In Genesis I,  God created "heaven and earth" but the universe is older than Earth (13.7 v. 4.6 billion years).  God then  "moved upon the face of the waters" then made Light (1:3) but didn't make light-producing objects (sun) until 4th day, then Darkness (dividing light into night and day) then Water divided to make the sky and the ocean (?)  (Gen 1:7)
We know that all heavy elements are born in collapsed stars that then explode, spewing their new non-hydrogen-only material into space.   So stars must have preceded oxygen which is necessary for water.  So there is no "water" for god to "move upon" without the creation and destruction of stars.
God then creates dry land, grass and seeds  but does this before sun created (1:16) which would have been necessary for photosynthesis.  Without the sun, the earth would be a frozen tundra; no life would have been possible.  And even if some life were able to evolve in such a cold, dark place, it would perish upon the sudden, blistering appearance of the sun, which would be a massive, cataclysmic game changer for which "grass and seeds" would not have been prepared.
The sun and moon (which is incorrectly described as lighting the night rather than reflecting the sun's light) were created THEN stars as an afterthought  ("he made the stars also" - Gen 1:16) to "give light upon the earth" 1:17 but most are not visible to the human eye.  He created Whales and every moving animal are created presumably before microbes (but after land plants, which is incorrect chronology of course)
Adam was made from dust (2:7) but was alone (asexual reproduction).  Adam names all the animals God parades before him 2:19-20, then, tired from his zoological exertions, goes to sleep.
God then "took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof" and made the rib into a woman 2:23.  Very strange stuff, but easily disprovable:  in 1543,Vesalius scandalized Christian Europe by showing that men and women have the same number of ribs.
Also, even if one were to accept that the earth's creation as described by biblical authors was not 6 days but some other long period, it still does not explain why we have fossils from the Cambrian Era 250 million years ago, whereas careful dating by generational analysis from Adam on gives us only 6,000 years.  Since one version of genesis claims man was created first, then the animals, the animals whose fossil remains we know to be hundreds of millions of years old could not possibly be explained.
So the Bible is either wrong about the appearance and order of life or the geological age of the earth or (most likely) both.  In fact, if you do accept "days" as "days" as most fundamentalists do, the creation of Earth is off by a factor of over a million, the proportional equivalent of claiming Los Angeles is only 17 feet from New York.
Nothing in quantum physics or modern cosmology helps defenders of the biblical authors.  If anything, every piece of evidence about how strange the universe is, how large, deep, and old, argues against anything those authors could have dreamed.   The idea that 99.9% of all matter was destroyed in the fraction of a second following the Big Bang by antimatter, for example.  Or that most of space is empty.  Or that most of our bodies and things we think of as solid are empty.   Very weird but unmentioned in the bible.  If god somehow oversaw or executed the Big Bang, he would have whispered in the ears of those who allegedly were channeling his spirit to write Genesis.  Since what we observe is so much larger and stranger and wondrous than what those scribes wrote down, isn't it clear that their inspiration was their own imagination, not god's?