Even here, our consistent perceptions, as pointed out, are only based on what we experience. When we start probing beyond what normal human evolution has conditioned us for, a lot more is needed. We need to learn how to use our equipment properly, we need to learn how to set-up proper conditions to gain proper experiences, etc.
This requires reasoning. This "reasoning" is something we learn through experience (lots of it), but the reasoning that is learned is forced to be a certain way because of the nature of the reality of those experiences (namely consistent). But that I can give a rant on my laboratory experiences (which I have almost a decade of) after my morning meeting.
I am just wondering how far the gap in agreement is.