Clearly he done no such thing teapot!
Feel free to correct me by pointing to the bit where he demolished anything i said about how science validates things.
He thinks maths is sufficient, you obviously just believe him. I stated quite clearly the flaws in chinas approach. He ignores it, desperate to insert maths and presuppositions, into a cause and effect scenario.
I will ask you the same questuon i asked china. What does maths cause in the natural world?
Clearly you are not following the thread well enough, to make daft posts like that tp x