The Limits Of Inductive Logic

Inductive logic has its limits.

Its validity decreases as the complexity of your subject increases.

In physics, you can take simple measurements that validate inductive thinking; for example, how long it takes an apple to fall from a tree. In evolutionary theory, you cannot; for example, the genetic sequencing of retroviruses that existed a billion years ago.

Why Evolutionists Are Stupid Morons In-Depth

In science, you pursue the hypothesis that is potentially provable; that is, there is the possibility of proving it. Proof consists of something that is experimentally repeatable. The so-called proof of evolution is all of biological history.

Well, now, we have two problems:

  1. No one has ever witnessed all of biological history; therefore, we don’t have even a single experiment to begin to build a proof.
  2. If we had a (past-only) time machine and could live billions of years, we could witness all of biological history but we would still only have a single experiment and could not “perform” additional experiments; therefore, we could not establish experimental repeatability and, therefore, could not build a proof.

Now, what evolutionists do in the face of this insurmountable obstacle is, like cheaters often do, to tell a lie. They say:

Well, you see, we are using inductive logic (many instances constitute proof).

The truth is:

Evolutionists use inductive interpretation (many instances inspire an opinion).