I wasn't showing mathematically that the bee can't fly, but instead, that the flying function of the bee cannot result from the molecular recombinations in a gene pool of the population which lacks this function.
To spell out more explicitly what others have said: You're not showing mathematically that evolution can't happen, but instead that your strawman version of evolution can't happen.
He says he wants to try to prove this through e coli experiments? At this rate he'll never be able to get to that part of his argument....
Nothing that anybody says here can stop him from doing experiments. If he did bring experimental data to back up his claims, he might have a leg to stand on. As it is, he's just re-interpreting the data from somebody else's experiments. That's a tired old creationist ploy and it isn't likely to get much respect here.
I am waiting patiently for someone to come along and challenge this model.
I'm waiting patiently for you to answer my question: Why did the scientists who did the experiments fail to see the implications that you see. Why did the peer reviewers fail to see what you see? Why did the hundreds/thousands of semi-interested scientists who read the paper(s) fail to see what you see?