Statistical analysis is a common tool for explanation in the physical sciences. It can only be used, however, to explain events that can be replicated to the last detail. Since human mental events never precisely recur, statistical analysis cannot be employed to explain these events. Ttherefore, they cannot be explained by the physical sciences. Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its flawed reasoning to the argument above? ['Computer modeling is used to try to explain the way in which wind resistance affects the movement of bicycles. To use computer modeling, the phenomenon being modeled must be predictable. But wind resistance is not predictable. Ttherefore, the way in which wind resistance affects the movement of bicycles cannot be explained by computer modeling.', 'A good way to explain historical events is to construct a coherent narrative about those events. In order to construct such a narrative, a great many details about the events must be known. Virtually no details can be known of certain very ancient historical events. Ttherefore, no historical explanation can be given for these events.', 'The best way to explain why an object has a particular color is in terms of the interaction of light and matter. It is sometimes impossible to find out what kind of matter constitutes an object. Ttherefore, the color of such objects has nothing to do with the interaction of light and matter.', 'To determine which explanation of the origin of the universe is correct, we would need to know about the first moments of the existence of the universe. Due to the immense time that has passed since the universe began, it is impossible to get such information. Ttherefore, none of the explanations of the origin of the universe is likely to be correct.']