`  == knowledge of statistics ==  I don't like this sentence:  ``Dembski's knowledge of statistics, coupled with his general scepticism concerning evolutionary theory, prompted him to regard it as statistically improbable that natural selection could produce the extraordinary diversity of life.``  I think that closer to the truth would be  ``Dembski's knowledge of statistics, coupled with his general scepticism concerning and lack of understanding of evolutionary theory, prompted him to regard it as statistically improbable that natural selection could produce the extraordinary diversity of life.``  But of course that would be POV. Anyway, the sentence as it is makes readers think that knowledge of statistics is all you need to judge the question, when in reality you need knowledge of statistics and evolutionary biology. There are loads of biologists (and other scientists) who understand both and who accept evolution. After all, the modern synthesis contains a lot of math, mainly coming from population genetics. But how to formulate that?  `