Neither I nor the Catholic Church "throw the first 11 chapters of Genesis in the garbage can."
For instance, there are at least 4 different ways to interpret the word "day" in the Creation accounts. The Catholic Church does not rule for or against any one of them as a matter of dogma.
There are likewise a half a dozen major, different ways to account for the biological diversity of life on earth. (Here I'm including even wild ones like Francis Crick's idea of "panspermia.") Catholic Church does not rule for or against any one of them as a matter of dogma, either.
I think the Cathoic Church shows an admirable and humble restraint in areas where our knowledge is so decisively incomplete.
But we've been around the block on this several times before, ZC. I will refrain from getting into it with you again.
God's concept of creation and of Himself is manifest in the Logos, that perfect system of all truth, beauty, goodness, order, precision and harmony. Those things discoverable empirically and with human reason do not require Divine Revelation, but are rather Natural Revelation. Whether math, physics, biochemistry, and even scientifically observable phenomenon and processes as the adaptation of species within a dynamic environment are all equally miraculous. An Old Testament pedagogy, absent an understanding of the Logos, cannot understand or explain Natural Revelation, only deny it.
Peace be with you
“The Bible and the natural sciences are in agreement when correctly interpreted.”
The false premise here is that human beings who “read the book of nature” are infallible like the scripture. I’ve read the Book of Nature myself, and reject them.