If you graph a model of our understanding of evolutionary processes and then add in the time ascribed from the first life on Earth, with rather fair variables, then you get nowhere near what we have now. So, something is missing in understanding, whatever it might be.
But only if you are looking for a specific result. Quick story to illustrate:
I was playing poker in a local pub tournament a few years ago. My son was also playing. He was the dealer at one point on his table. And he flopped three aces. Wow. Everyone impressed. Then the turn was the fourth ace. And the river a king. Everyone was taking pictures of the cards. What were the odds!
Well, the odds were exactly the same as the next hand dealt, which were random cards. The aces and kings looked impressive because a decision had been made
in advance that 4 aces are one of the best hands you can get. If
in advance we had decided that the two of clubs, the six of hearts, the nine of diamonds and the jack of spades was the best hand then dealing that hand would look impressive as well.
To look impressive, you need to decide
in advance what you are looking for. If it’s the four aces or if it’s the two of clubs etc then dealing those out does look as if it’s
against the odds. But the odds for dealing the aces and the two of clubs etc are
exactly the same.
So to say that the odds of reaching a point where man has evolved are fantastic is only valid if that’s the result you want.