[Fester Chugabrew]

Yes, both are "kin" because both are examples of theories confirmed by inductive reasoning about a large set of samples that have evinced insignificant countervailing evidence on repeated samplings.

Yes, but that is as far as it goes. Woe to the scientist who mingles numbers with the physical world, for he will soon discover that what is incapable of physical grasp must be applied to what the eyeballs see. This would be a great time to assert lack of intelligent design altogether, but why would an intelligent being want to do that?

[donh]

Yes, both are "kin" because both are examples of theories confirmed by inductive reasoning about a large set of samples that have evinced insignificant countervailing evidence on repeated samplings.

Yes, but that is as far as it goes. Woe to the scientist who mingles numbers with the physical world, for he will soon discover that what is incapable of physical grasp must be applied to what the eyeballs see

What? Does what you just wrote here make sense even to you?