First off, the title is terribly imprecise, you're not arguing that probabilistic AI can't be AI, you're arguing that animal intelligence is not probabilistic.
Second off, I personally find your theses unconvincing because the simple statements are easily refuted, and there's not enough supporting information to make them into tighter arguments.
For example, for your first bullet point, the underlying mechanism could be highly probabilistic, without our consciousness having access to the probabilities as they are executed. We do not have conscious knowledge of neuron potentials, or of any other internal state of the physical mechanisms of our consciousness, but that does not mean that they don't exist.
Further, people are bad at reasoning period, and have to be taught how to do it in school. It's only through much training that we learn reasoning from certainties, and reasoning with uncertainty will similarly require training.
Finally, I don't think that anybody is saying that our brains operate SVMs or RBMs or anything like that, they are merely computational mechanisms to replicate the behavior of complex networks of neurons; there may be direct analogs to computation in how neurons integrate chemical, electrical, and epigenetic signals, but it's not clear that they're exactly the same thing; and that doesn't mean that even if it's completely different, that a probabilistic AI can't be an Intelligence.
These are heady matters that people put a lot of careful thought into, and while there's definitely room for light discussion among friends, I'm not sure that this is the right material for HN.