I'm fairly certain that having plants before the Sun contradicts most scientific consensus. Though, right now I'm focused on the things that are strikingly similar to our current observable knowledge. I also leave a lot of room for the scientific community to discover reasons to adapt their theories, as has historical happened. It is important to note that 'light' existed on 'day' one, and perhaps in a few hundred years we will discover a more specific description of how that was true, but the story doesn't claim plants grew without light. (Regarding the 'days' of the creation story, I certainly leans towards interpreting that poetically, for a few reasons, not the least of which being the lack of the Sun until 'day' four.)