We're getting into definitions here. You are correct that someone can start out with utterly false premises, and then reason logically from there. But he will end up with a conclusion that is at odds with observations (The "reality" of Noah's flood is an easy example, following quite logically from the premise of the literal truth of Genesis.) Such a conclusion will be logically valid, but false. [ What Would We Expect to Find if the World had Flooded?]. The scientist, faced with a contradiction between theory and reality, would go back and review his assumptions. The dogmatist will not. So what word do we use to describe a person who clings to obviously false dogma?
So what is the theory of evolution? Is that how evolutionists avoid contradiction - by never saying what the theory of evolution is?
In my post I used the word insane. I happen to believe that logic is an editing function rather than a productive function. I think people build their world view pretty much independently of logic (if I could describe how, I'd be rich and famous). What we call logic is a rather recent invention in the history of mankind. And of course the systematic and iterative application of logic and experiment is even more recent.
But I think even scientists form their ideas of how the world is and what what should happen in experiments before the results are in. Sanity is conforming to unexpected results.