That's a logical fallasy!

[robvalue]

Sure, you can indeed produce what happens to be a true conclusion with faulty logic.

What I was trying to point out earlier is that unless the conclusion is already known to be true or false, for good reasons, you cannot assess whether the conclusion you've drawn is actually true. It still might be true or might not, and you've given no indication which or how likely each possibility is. So the argument is pointless.

As per the example I gave earlier:

My name is rob, therefore God doesn't exist.

I might have produced a true conclusion, but I have not demonstrated that it is actually true. And since we know nothing more after the argument than before, it is worthless.