Hypothesis 36
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
(Isaiah 5:20) NKJV
Occam’s razor used to crop up frequently in the discussion on Twitter as if the atheist science trolls (ASTs) were appealing to a deity. As such it’s listed as a major deity in the atheist pantheon.
Since we’ve begun pointing out the elemental flaws in the value of Occam’s razor, and shown how it disproves both heliocentricity and the origin of species by evolution this gives us a predictive testable hypothesis:
Predictive Testable Hypothesis 36
- IF Occam’s razor is a philosophical train wreck which produces an undesirable outcome in two key areas of mainstream science (SciPop):
- THEN it will disappear from casual usage
- AND the new norm will be to backpedal from it.
As you may expect the ASTs have been backpedaling quite hard. This is now the prevailing attitude regarding Occam’s razor:
“Occam is a philosophical tenet, not scientific. Science doesn’t defer and call something true because it’s simple. It’s about prioritizing effort.”
– Backpedaling Trolls
| Where did you come from? | |
| 1 | March 9th – God Planted a Garden |
| 2 | July 23rd – Occam’s Razor |
The Naked Prophet 