Logical inferences, cause and effect, yes, of course.
Then the question is: what is OP' s claim. he says: Q-proof. What then is being proven? hHat the assertion by Q is materializing. Hence, a Q -proof.
The source, or rather the reason why Q was right is a different matter al together. It indeed may have been a logical inference, A Logical Prediction based on game-theory, or simply a looking glass event. Or even all three together.
Is it amazing? Maybe maybe not. In and of itself, in isolation, it may not be an earth-shattering revelation. Taken with all proofs to date, it add to the solidity of Q.
Logical inferences, cause and effect, yes, of course.
Then the question is: what is OP' s claim. he says: Q-proof. What then is being proven? hHat the assertion by Q is materializing. Hence, a Q -proof.
The source, or rather the reason why Q was right is a different matter al together. It indeed may have been a logical inference, A Logical Prediction based on game-theory, or simply a looking glass event. Or even all three together.
Is it amazing? Maybe maybe not. In and of itself, in isolation, it may not be an earth-shattering revelation. Taken with all proofs to date, it add to the solidity of Q.