Not so. There is no logical connection between the feasibility of a human believing something and its truth. Something can be true and impossible to believe simultaneously.
Something can be true and impossible to believe simultaneously.
I think that's the category that Wittenstein summarizes as "things you can't talk about".
I've raised arguments for philosophical scepticism before, which have mostly been argued against in a Popper-esque manner of arguing that even if we don't know anything with certainty, we can have legitimate knowledge on probabilities.
The problem with this, however, is how you answer a sceptic about the notion of probability having a correlation with reality. Probability depends upon axioms of probability- how are said axioms to be justified? It can't be by definition, or it has no correlation to reality.