I think you need to think more carefully about what order and disorder mean. The terms as you want to use them are anthropomorphic, and not scientifically useful. Dembski has run into the same problem with his attempt to define 'complex specified information'. He wants to define something he can give a numerical value to, but anything he can come up with doesn't correspond particularly closely to the purpose he wants it to serve.
The difference in entropy between a 200 pound chimp and a 200 pound human is negligible, and I couldn't begin to speculate whether the chimp is higher or lower. Entropy has nothing to do with evolution. That's worth repeating: entropy has nothing to do with evolution.
What do you mean by 'reverse entropy'? A decrease in entropy? The total entropy in any spontaneous process must increase; a local decrease must be matched by a larger increase somewhere else.
Only in a closed system. The universe may not be closed.
Also, entropy is in the eyes of the beholder, is it not?