"all you need to do is simply look at some of the incredible discoveries such as the dna code which is more complex than a computer code. There are so many fascinating things that point to a creator."
An unintelligent creator perhaps, for leaving 98.5% of our entire 3.2 billion nucleotide base genome more or less consisting of ERVs, pseudogenes, and noncoding DNA.
"If you look up the definition of science it would include the study of creationism. It simply is a very strong opposing theory to toe. Hope you can at least be open minded enough to admit that."
I don't see any definition of science that includes creationism. Creationism isn't science as it isn't falsfiable, tentative, naturalistic, parsimonious, accurate, encompassing nor supported.
Don't bother with that one - he's spouting the same -er...- "erroneous impressions" he gibbered about two weeks ago, despite having in the interim been soundly corrected.