About the mathematic impossibilities of evolution:
There are a few flaws in your reasoning. First of all, how can you calculate the number of mutations such a process would take? The very fact that you said it would take more than a 100 billion years makes me doubt these numbers are accurate, simply because to get such a number, someone would have had to calculate the number of mutations it would take to go from single cell organism to animal. That would be 3,153,600,000,000,000,000 mutations. First of all, who could have accurately calculate such a number. I mean, even just 1% error throws your mathematical evidence off a billion years. It is impossible to calculate such numbers with any accuracy.
Secondly, what constitutes a mutation? If it is the change of one piece of genetic information, that\'s inaccurate as well. When a mutation happens, it doesn\'t happen slowly. It happens suddenly, and takes a long time to become dominant due to natural selection. A mutation can change a lot of genetic information, relatively quickly.
Want an example? A really basic one is looking at the average human. The average human right now is taller than a few hundred years ago. This is a slight change in our nature, a slight mutation if you will. One mainly due to improved conditions in cities, and improved diets. Now, if the average height of humans can change noticeably in a few 100 years, an incredibly small amount of time compared to 4 billion years, a lot can happen a lot quicker than you are saying.
As for thermodynamics, I don\'t know too much in detail about it, but I can say that your reasoning here is useless as well. Why does the idea that the convertion of energy from one form to another make the creation of galaxies from an explosion impossible? I mean, not all the energy from the explosion necessarily has to be used in the creation of these galaxies. We don\'t have specific numbers, it\'s just theoretical. There is no way you can prove that even with the loss of energy, there wasn\'t enough remaining to create galaxies.
As for your mouse trap thing, that doesn\'t work either, simply because in a mutation, more than one simple piece of genetic information is changed. Mutations aren\'t as slow as you are implying. They are rather rapid things, it is natural selection that takes time.
As for schools, the information is not really out of date at all. If evolution were not scientifically sound, it would not be the most widely accepted theory. If you ask me, creationism is the thing that is inaccurate, and outdated. And I also believe religion should definitely stay out of schools. Yeah.
A bit of a disclaimer to finish this post with. I don\'t know any of this subject matter extensively. The fact is, we are all arguing against opposing theories created by people who are likely much much smarter and more knowledgable than anyone here. So...yeah.
