2 Peter 3:8

[shernren]

If two time lines describe the same events but with a different order of events, they are contradictory. This is a basic concept in the court of law.

Polly was a bird, who I bought. (The LORD created Adam, who was a human.)
And I bought a cage for Polly. (And the LORD had planted the garden of Eden.)
And I put Polly in the cage. (And the LORD placed Adam in the garden of Eden.)
And I bought food for Polly. (And the LORD had formed beasts from the earth.)
And Polly didn't like the food. (And the LORD brought them to Adam to find a suitable helper, but a suitable helper was not found.)

I would assume that the narrator of this story about Polly the bird had already bought the cage and the food before obtaining Polly... but I only assume this because I was first read the other account of the story:

I bought a cage for a bird.
I bought food for a bird.
I bought a bird and named it Polly.
I put Polly in the cage I had bought.
I gave Polly a choice of food.

The problem isn't so much in the logic as in its textuality, as Mallon has pointed out. The Genesis 1 account uses the waw consecutive - the "and"s of your example - to string together the seven days of creation. The Genesis 2 account uses the waw consecutive again to string together Adam's account.

The creationists will insist that the waw consecutive of Genesis 1 indicates a historicized order. They will say that it conflicts with science because, for example, science says that the Earth came after the Sun and birds after land creatures whereas the ordering of Genesis 1 indicates otherwise. Well, what then is the ordering of Genesis 2 (employing the same waw consecutive)? Chopped liver?

How can you have and mean two different things in two neighbouring chapters and still claim to be reading Genesis literally?