Whether Dan did or not, I don't remember. It's a fairly typical assumption when people are dealing with probabilities in a very gross, imprecise way. No one should take my argument as being an assertion that the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. Each confirming line of evidence increases our confidence in the claimed hypothesis. It doesn't of course prove it.
Absolute proof is hard to come by in the sciences.
However, Dan was claiming that the 100 lines of confirming evidence exist. It would also be relatively easy to get him to volunteer the view that creationists have not provided one single testable hypothesis against evolution which has been established. The talk.origins archives are full of attempted falsifying hypotheses, alleged supporting data and refutations. You can also find in the talk.origins archives examples of findings that would falsify evolution. Provide them now and let some of the experts in this group tackle them.