If you recheck my post you will find that I never claimed that inductive reasoning was unscientific, only that inductive reasoning does not have the same validity as deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is indeed proper (and necessary) in science; it just does not lead to conclusions with the same confidence as deductive reasoning or direct empirical observation. Nor should you take umbrage with my characterization of the conclusions of natural evolution as conjecture. This is not meant as a pejorative but as a recognition of limits of the study. Indeed, as I am sure you would agree, the proper use of conjecture is necessary in science. I also want to note that I never said the natural evolution was false (I believe that the premise is unprovable either way), only that is should not cloak its conclusions with the same confidence as the empirical sciences.
Evolutionary biology is an empirical science, and in no respect is it substantially different from any other empirical science.