In Logic of Scientific Discovery (2002), Popper makes an argument against inductive reasoning on the grounds that all statements logically follow from an internally contradictory statement, and, thus, if one were to rely on inductive reasoning, all statements (evidence) would support every internally contradictory statement (see the attached screenshot from Logic of Scientific Discovery (2002) for the actual context). (I can’t tell how to make logical symbols on here, so excuse my screenshots.)