JC, I enjoyed your presentation on logic, and as a mathematician/scientist/engineer, I appreciate the role of logic in proofs and arguments, however, I do have a problem with people taking scientific tools and trying to apply them to non-science situations and also treating statistical studies as if they were automatically factual and irrefutable.
Many tend to extend the posits of logic, which deal in facts and objective matters, to opinions and subjective matters. One cannot prove using strict logic that one's opinion on foreign policy or gun control or premarital sex is the one RIGHT one, simply because there are a multitude of factors, many subjective, that form one's outlook on complex matters, and everyone has a right to formulate and hold their own opinion on subjective topics. Believing that the world is flat is a silly "opinion" because the round shape of the world is an objective fact. Believing that premarital sex is a positive growth experience is simply one subjective view out of many.
Quoting statistics and studies doesn't necessarily prove a point either and one should be cautious about taking them as fact. Statistics are only as good as the methodology/protocol used to gather the data...bad data will never yield good statistics. Also, the statistical protocols/techniques used to gather and summarize the data are often chosen at the discretion of the person(s) running the study, who uses his/her best judgement in selection (and may have ulterior motives or may just pick the method that tips the conclusion in the preferred direction...not that this happens in all statistical studies, but it is a real phenomenon). There are a myriad of statistical tools available and rarely is there one "correct" tool for the application. Any one study should be taken with a grain of skepticism and until a body of similar evidence/conclusion is available, assume that statistics are either consciously or unconsciously flawed or biased.
In general, statistical investigation is not the same as the scientific method, although they share some similarities. Trying to determine what factors reduce repeat criminal behavior is not the same as trying to isolate the virus that causes a given disease.