"If you misinterpret my posts , I will misinterpret yours . I meant `` unlikely `` to mean `` probably not true. `` That does not mean that it is necessarily false . Without much data in that example , it is impossible to tell for sure what is `` true. ``"
"Really ? Let 's go to the OP . You said `` What this post explains is that OccamÂ ’ s razor denies the accuracy of the bible because it makes too many assumptions to be more likely than the scientific explanation . Therefore , it is poor logic to accept the bible without further evidence. `` Now , if we are not `` to accept the bible `` , what are we supposed to do ? '' See my first example for a reason that we should keep our beliefs uncomplicated whenever possible . If we didnÂ ’ t , we would be swamped with thousands of explanations for very simple events , and most of the explanations would be illogical. `` What do you mean by `` illogical `` . In context it seems that you are saying `` wrong `` . Are you ? If not , specify in detail how do you think an `` illogical `` belief would be correct ? '' Except that Occam 's razor is used for comparing hypotheses. `` Back to a scientific use of parsimony . What are we comparing them for ? '' Most likely `` or for which hypothesis is true and which is false ? I submit that you are being disingenuous . You actually mean that you can use parsimony to decide which hypothesis is true , but , when pressed that this does n't work , fall back to `` most likely `` . So let me ask , how `` most likely `` ? What are the odds ? How do you compute them ? Is `` most likely `` 51 % ot 49 % or 100 % to 0 % or somewhere in between ? Or does it change for each situation ? If `` most likely `` changes , then how do we know what you actually mean ?"
"I will misinterpret yours . I meant `` unlikely `` to mean `` probably not true. `` That does not mean that it is necessarily false ."
"Really ? Let 's go to the OP . You said `` What this post explains is that OccamÂ ’ s razor denies the accuracy of the bible"