So then how scientifically strong is the theory of those who understand everything to be evidence of evolution? Besides, there may be some unorganized matter out there that does not behave according to predictable laws, so it is not as if my scientific model is unfalsifiable. It just hasn't been falsified to date. The probabilities are in its favor.
Hmm ... So you've accepted my criticism of your notion, since your question above implicitly accepts it as accurate. It's progress.
To continue, "the theory of those who understand everything to be evidence of evolution?" I can't be sure I know what you're trying to state here, but if it's what I think it is, there isn't anyone like that ... except people who gets their scientific information from creationist websites. But for those who actually know something about science, the existence of electrons is not understood to be evidence of evolution, the planet Jupiter has nothing whatever to do with evolution, and color theory is irrelevant. That's just three off the top of my head. Examples abound.
Besides, there may be some unorganized matter out there that does not behave according to predictable laws, so it is not as if my scientific model is unfalsifiable.
And there may be an invisible pink leprechaun out there ... so what? Your incoherent streak remains unbroken ... if it's matter, it's organized. If it weren't, wouldn't be matter. (You might want to read up on what constitutes a scientific "falsification," btw. Your attempt isn't even close).
It just hasn't been falsified to date. The probabilities are in its favor.
Would you please provide the calculations you've use to come up with these "probabilities"? Too bad tortoise signed out; I'm sure he/she/it would love them.
I've fed you enough today, Fester. I'm crossing the bridge now. Have fun scaring the billy goats. Bye-bye.