Definition

Also called Invincible Ignorance.

The proper conclusion of an inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary.

Explanation

This fallacy is committed when, although there is enough evidence to make a safe inference, the inference is denied without suppport for the denial.

Examples

Hugo has had twelve accidents in the last six months, yet he insists that it is just a coincidence and not his fault.
Inductively, the evidence is statistically overwhelming that it is his fault, most of the time.

Poll after poll shows that the N.D.P will win fewer than ten seats in Parliament. Yet the party leader insists that the party is doing much better than the polls suggest.
The N.D.P. in fact got nine seats.

Counter-examples

None.

Advices

About all you can do in such a case is to point to the strength of the inference.