> No. We have never observed a star become a red giant. I never actually claimed that we have seen a star become a red giant, but that we have made observation

> No. We have never observed a star become a red giant. I never actually claimed that we have seen a star become a red giant, but that we have made observations that allow us to conclude that some stars become red giants. Perhaps you can enlighten me on what explanatory theory is. Does explanatory theory make use of observation? Because based on the the wiki page for inductive reasoning, if you use observations for evidence, then you are using inductive reasoning to some capacity. > Going into detail on how that process works is a little too long for an HN comment. We don't have to get into details on the star life-cycle and I get why there are issues with inductive reasoning regarding certainty. I am just trying to understand what you consider inductive reasoning to be, given that I think you used inductive reasoning to call inductive reasoning invalid.