Quote:

I was asking how getting the DNA from a foreign source, still doesn't explain how that foreign DNA was written in the first place.



Then I haven't understood the question. Insertion of foreign DNA from other species is a frequent mutation of bacteriae and virae, but does not happen - as to my knowledge - in higher organisms. There the most frequent mutation is a point mutation. "Writing a DNA" by point mutations occurs in the way I described above, as an accumulation of beneficial mutations.

Quote:

Creationists would not say the earth, or life, is in the state it was at the beginning of creation. Potentially having a bit to do with the second law of thermodynamics, but there's so much confusion surrounding that law that it could be a whole other debate.



Only confusion among creationists. For an average educated person with some mathematical background, thermodynamics is easy to understand.

Quote:

Albeit rocks could have looked like they were older, its simply assumed that all heavy elements came from stars. Which is unverifiable, and actually scientifically unimaginable.



Apart from the fact that we observe all those "unverifiable, and actually scientifically unimaginable" heavy elements in star and supernova spectrae since 150 years.

Quote:

Creationists attribute the observations of nature to an all-powerful creator, evolutionists attribute all natural observations to an all-powerful nothingness.



If you think this over a little, you might notice that quite the opposite is true.

Creationists attribute the observations of nature to the actions of supernatural forces, scientists attribute the observations of nature to the actions of natural forces. What does that mean for a creator?

If you open your eyes and look around, you'll see that nature is running without any obvious supernatural events. The Creator (let us assume for a moment that he or she exists) does not need to manually rotate the earth or apply the breath of life to every living being. Obviously the world is designed to run automatically without permanent divine interventions.

The logical conclusion is that the Creator wanted to world to run this way. For this, he implemented the mechanism that science calls "nature's law".

The assumption that the world still needs supernatural interventions in order to develop species implies a limited ability or limited power of the creator. Only a bad watchmaker needs to push his watches from time to time to keep them running.

Scientists who believe in some creator attribute him the creation of the world and possibly the creation of nature's laws. They certainly do not attribute him the need to intervene permanently.

Permanent intervention is the belief of creationists. This is the belief in a lesser god. Admittedly all belief systems started this way. Ancient cultures also believed in gods that run the world by supernatural forces. Their gods carried the sun over the firmament, and, as creationists still believe today, literally created all species.

Thus, creationists do obviously not believe in an all-powerful creator. An all-powerful creator is basically an evolutionist belief (of religious evolutionists). I know that this might have come as a surprise to you, but if you think it over, it's just logical.