It acknowledges only the coarsest, least subtle relationship between one bit of information and another. Yes or no. Agree or disagree. No matter how rich and nuanced, observations that don't measure up in this way, that don't inform some hypothesis, often end up in a garbage can instead of in a scholarly journal. Furthermore, real-word tests of hypotheses rarely, if ever, work this way.
Deductive logic does a lousy job of describing empirical science.
Every experiment results in a revision of some probability distribution, not outright refutation or unambiguous corroboration. Empirical science is inferential, not deductive. It also allows for more subtle, less definitive, experimental tests. A measurement can be relevant without being definitive. While not abandoning traditional notions of hypothesis and proof, systems biologists acknowledge the value of the discovery approach.