I think you misunderstood my question. I meant "existing outcomes" as the status quo en toto. Science must launch from a set of givens, i.e. "existing outcomes." Another way to look at it: science stands on the shoulders of previous results. The object of science is a physical universe that operates under consistent "existing outcomes" and yields matter capable of mathematical definition.
Science does not waste its time calculating the probability of things that have already happened. Science searches for the causes.
There is scarcely anything of any consequense that has not been attributed to the intervention of gods. Storms, earthquakes, diseases, crop failures, crop successes, happiness, unhappiness, fertility, infertility, islands rising from the sea -- all have been attributed to intervention.
Science is that form of inquiry that starts with the assumption on nonintervention, and seeks to find regular patterns of causes.