Not to mention that he or some creationist pulled that number out of thin air.
"Of course, this is all Creationist theory and creationist science. I don't really understand why Unne called it a pseudo-science. But my sources are fairly sound, as far as I can tell."
No, there would need to be science for it to be a scientific theory, or science at all. Inserting miracles negates any possibility of it being taken seriously.
"Evolution is unlikely"
The theory of how evolution occurs may be questionable, as it is an imperfect and possibly even incorrect model. Abiogenesis certainly is questionable, as any evidence of how life started on this planet is most likely long since gone (note that this has nothing to do with evolution). The FACT of evolution, that life has progressed from simpler forms to more complex ones, is not seriously doubted by anyone but religous zealots and people ignorant of science.
EDIT: This addresses your probability, not that it has much to do with evolution
