Burden of Proof

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't but I don't see it as being the only method to make an advancement, as after all if random processes can create a universe then why not a typewriter or a civilisation. But then again I don't believe in random forces even at the microcosmic level.

Ultimately, "random forces" (I dont even have the patience to engage you on yet another issue where you are clearly and woefully out of your depth - so I'll run with it) -did- make typewriters and civilization. Here they are.

The geneticist Steve Jones has noted it as a mystery which is ‘unanswered by science’, a point which is echoed by Jared Diamond:
... we descend to a glaring failure: the inability of twentieth-century science to formulate an adequate Theory of Penis Length... astonishing as it seems, important functions of the human penis remain obscure.

I won't wait (sry have'nt) for science to prove or explain fully the origin of the penis with logic before putting it to good use. Logic didn't come into it.

You'll find it difficult to -explain- anything about that penis of yours without leveraging a little logic. How do you know you aren't using my penis btw. You're leveraging the concept of identity at the very least.

Seems Einstein didn't wait for logic either

Albert Einstein wrote on the discovery of laws:

“There is no logical way to the discovery of these elemental laws. There is only the way of intuition, which is helped by a feeling for the order lying behind appearance.” (Beveridge, 1950)

Intuition is a very pretty word for imagination, which can be hit or miss, true. Thing is, without taking those things one imagines and applying some logic you could conceivably discover billions of contradictory things - your discoveries would be entirely fruitless, no matter how many you made - and it would take a hell of along time to figure out which works by trial and error (and just as an added insult - that discovery that worked might itself be in error, working by some other unknown mechanism).

Categorical fail, you still don't seem to fully grasp the subject. To use your tool analogy, intuition is a great tool for imagining what could be, science a great tool for what is, reason for helping you distinguish between the two.