In philosophy, a “cumulative case argument” basically means that the body of evidence points clearly to one conclusion. In courtrooms, this is sometimes called “clear and convincing evidence”.
When all plausible explanations and sound evidential arguments point in the same direction, how can anyone ignore that?
Robin Collins explains…
special feature video from “The Case for a Creator” DVD, Lee Strobel
A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question. – Sir Fred Hoyle