Right.  That's why I said it's a huge stretch.  With that logic, I fashioned a hamburger from the clay of the earth yesterday.  Ridiculous.  There's probably an overwhelming amount of Patristic consensus in favor of a literal interpretation here.

I agree completely, but Humani Generis still allows debate regarding the evolution of man regardless. If it was dogmatic fact that Adam came straight from the matter of the earth, then how is there any room for evolution whatsoever?

How would you reconcile this with the fact that you've argued the ordinary magisterium can't be harmful to souls, and Pius XII pretty clearly allows this issue to be debated in an encyclical?

How does something contradicting sacred scripture in and of itself make it heretical without an ecclesial pronouncement?

I'll assume for the sake of argument that you're right that this clearly contradicts sacred scripture.  I think you might well be right.  But my questions remain.

While it's objectively heretical, it's true that a Catholic wouldn't be a formal heretic because of Pius XII's "permission".

So the difference between objective heresy and formal heresy.  It's always been a dogma, for instance, that Our Lady was immaculately conceived, and it's denial objectively heretical.  But St. Thomas was not a heretic because it had not been defined yet.

We're a similar spot with this issue (and a few others).

Pius XII neither taught nor defined anything here.  He did lots of harm, but none of it is protected by infallibility.  If anything he's in the same boat as Honorius when it comes to tolerating heresy.

I recommend (in book form): http://kolbecenter.org/creation-rediscovered/
and http://kolbecenter.org/review-of-special-creation-rediscovered/

I have read G. Keane's Creation Rediscovered. It contains many mistakes and misunderstandings in science, as well as some poor argumentation in theology. I would not recommend this book to anyone who wants to know clear, solid arguments.

Catholics, especially Traditional Catholics, should first and foremost be firmly convinced from their Faith and from Divine Authority that Evolution is a False Theory and is Objective Heresy against Divine Revelation, which almost certainly will be struck with anathema one day. Even before Nicaea, many Fathers knew and said it is dogma that Christ is God and the opposite is heresy, based on Scripture and Tradition. Similarly, Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition do not by any means give those who seriously study them leeway to believe death and destruction continued for aeons before Adam was supposedly even created, from an ape; and in practice almost all evolutionists are polygenists anyway. Polygenism is totally heresy and denies Original Sin and all of Christianity. There was that discovery of "Y Chromosomal Adam" and "Mitochondrial Eve" not that long ago, which again Confirms Creation.

Evolutionists will absurdly say "Adam never met Eve", "Adam and Eve were not the only parents", there were other persons, and other silly excuses, but they are all wrong. True Science confirms True Tradition of the Special Creation of Mankind less than 10,000 years ago.

"Using the new, more accurate rate, Mitochondrial Eve lived only about 6,500 years ago ... In 2010, a comprehensive comparison was made between the DNA on the male Y chromosome of humans and chimpanzees. The differences were more than 30 percent! 13
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FAQ318.html#wp7074454

Please see the link to learn more: the other absurdities evolutionists rely on to evade the truth of monogenism are answered there.

The best way to decimate evolution once and for all is to demonstrate scientifically the Scriptural Fact that Humanity, the Earth and All of Creation is Young. If there were not millions or billions of years for the alleged evolution to take place, evolution will die a natural death.

Creation has 101 excellent proofs that the Earth is Young. https://creation.com/age-of-the-earth I will summarize just 3 here (1) The Fact that DNA cannot survive 10,000 years, as mentioned earlier, and almost universally admitted even by evolutionists; combined with the fact that DNA has been found in some of the earth's most ancient fossils is proof that millions of years just simply never passed. (2) Tissue, Blood Cells, Haemoglobin etc being found still intact in Dinosaurs and other ancient animals is another proof of a young earth. "Evidence of hemoglobin, and the still-recognizable shapes of red blood cells, in unfossilized dinosaur bone is powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible’s account of a recent creation." https://creation.com/sensational-dinosaur-blood-report (3) C-14 is radioactive with a short half-life of around 5730 years. It is certain that C-14 cannot survive in ancient materials more than 100,000 years old, yet it is repeatedly found in those claimed to be several millions or even billions of years old, see this from St. Kolbe's Centre: "Carbon 14 is an isotope formed by the radioactive decay of carbon atoms, which is not supposed to be detectable in organic material older than about 50,000 to 60,000 years because of its short half life. However, it is often found in materials dated by other methods to be millions of years old, including petroleum, coal, wood, and bone, and has even been detected in diamonds otherwise dated at billions of years of age.[10],[11],[12]" Please see http://kolbecenter.org/question-of-time/ for the full article.

Next, consider the known disproofs of the false methodology that evolutionists use: "This dating technique was recently tested for accuracy and failed.15 Three independent laboratories were sent a sample of basalt produced by an Hawaiian volcanic eruption less than 200 years ago. The testing results varied from 20 million years to 3 billion years.16, 17". So a rock of known age that was in fact less than 200 years old was "computed" to age between 20 million-3 billion years! http://archives.sspx.org/against_sound_bites/devolution_of_evolution.htm There were independent disproofs of that wrong age.

"Big Bang" Theory was founded by a Belgian Catholic priest and physicist - the Jesuit Fr. Georges Lemaitre.

Tell us about them! What are those "many mistakes and misunderstandings in science, as well as some poor argumentation in theology".

The book gives the idea that radiometric decay rates have changed substantially. That's a testable hypothesis, and there is no evidence of significant variation - definitely not enough to change radiometric dates. The book says similar about the speed of light changing. Again, that can be checked observationally, and the evidence isn't there. The book implies that radiometric dating methods assume starting isotope ratios. Isochron methods definitely don't The book has stuff about polonium halos. At minimum, that part is out of date.

All of this is explained in other books. Keane's book doesn't show much awareness of counterarguments.

If someone really wants to know the truth on this topic, that someone should read widely from a range of views. We don't need to defend poor arguments.

The book gives the idea that radiometric decay rates have changed substantially. That's a testable hypothesis, and there is no evidence of significant variation - definitely not enough to change radiometric dates. The book says similar about the speed of light changing. Again, that can be checked observationally, and the evidence isn't there. The book implies that radiometric dating methods assume starting isotope ratios. Isochron methods definitely don't The book has stuff about polonium halos. At minimum, that part is out of date.

All of this is explained in other books. Keane's book doesn't show much awareness of counterarguments.

If someone really wants to know the truth on this topic, that someone should read widely from a range of views. We don't need to defend poor arguments.

No idea why you're getting downvoted. Catholics should be lovers of the Truth, even if it means convenient "facts" must be discarded. 

The book gives the idea that radiometric decay rates have changed substantially. That's a testable hypothesis, and there is no evidence of significant variation - definitely not enough to change radiometric dates. The book says similar about the speed of light changing. Again, that can be checked observationally, and the evidence isn't there. The book implies that radiometric dating methods assume starting isotope ratios. Isochron methods definitely don't The book has stuff about polonium halos. At minimum, that part is out of date.

All of this is explained in other books. Keane's book doesn't show much awareness of counterarguments.

If someone really wants to know the truth on this topic, that someone should read widely from a range of views. We don't need to defend poor arguments.

I knew Gerry well and he gave me his book to read before publishing it. I myself was writing a similar book on the absurdity of a Big Bang world as we find it today. Then out came Pope John Paul II saying 'evolution was more than a hypothesis.' That's enough I said, putting my book into the bin. When one has to try to compete with popes and their Big Bang evolution, then the devil has won hands down on that subject.

At that time a man called Paul Ellwanger had also contacted me to say that evolution is but an offspring of the Copernican theory, and that the creation account offered to Catholics for 200 years has long departed from the ex nihilo dogma of Catholic theology. That creation theology is simplicity itself, as Archbishop Lefebvre said, God creating all in perfection (that is finished) at the beginning of time, just as Genesis said, understandable to the simplist of minds.
So, in order to understand why a pope like Francis will get up and tell the flock God is not a magician, and receive such applause from Professor Queres in the front row

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news/video/royal-baby-watch-prince-harry-cancels-official-visit-to-the-netherlands-58819653917

one has to know that long history from Faith to fiction. Without a return to the dogma of biblical geocentrism, Catholic creation doctrine can never return to a faith based doctrine. I told Gerry Keane if he went along with the story of Galileoism as put out for 200 years by Churchmen, then you are really wasting your time. Gerry said it was hard enough to get Catholics today to believe no such evolution took place without asking them to accept geocentrism. When he published, he walked into it, quoting a Protestant to dismiss the authority of the 1616 decree and every other trap set up to undermine the faith. His paragraph on Galileo did a lot more harm that his arguments against evolution achieved.