Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"

  • 75 Replies
  • 9941 Views
*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« on: May 03, 2014, 04:07:00 PM »
For those who are unaware, let me first state that Occam's razor is the principle that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions, and therefore the simplest, is most often correct. This is a very useful principle in the pseudoscience against science, or flat earth against round earth, debate. Consider the following statements:

When at sea it is possible to see high mountains or elevated lights in the distance before lower-lying ground and the mast of a boat before the hull. It is also possible to see further by climbing higher in the ship, or, when on land, on high cliffs.

The sun is lower in the sky as you travel away from the tropics. For example, when traveling northward, stars such as Polaris, the north star, are higher in the sky, whereas other bright stars such as Canopus, visible in Egypt, disappear from the sky.

The length of daylight varies more between summer and winter the farther you are from the equator.

The earth throws a circular shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse.

The times reported for lunar eclipses (which are seen simultaneously) are many hours later in the east (e.g. India) than in the west (e.g. Europe). Local times are confirmed later by travel using chronometers and telegraphic communication.

When you travel far south, to Ethiopia or India, the sun throws a shadow south at certain times of the year. Even farther (e.g. Argentina) and the shadow is always in the south.

It is possible to circumnavigate the world.

Travelers who circumnavigate the earth observe the gain or loss of a day relative to those who did not.

An artificial satellite can circle the earth continuously and even be geostationary.

The earth appears as a disc on photographs taken from space, regardless of the vantage point.



Now, consider which of the hypotheses is the simplest. Obviously, the round earth. The flat earth "theory" states that each of these statements is either a conspiracy or a blatant lie or another convoluted means of attacking the "truth" of the flat earth.

But the truth is, the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct, and it's clear and simple that the earth is round.
I challenge any flat-earther to provide ten concrete pieces of evidence that the earth is flat, and that the earth being flat is simpler than it being round.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2014, 04:12:52 PM by V »
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #1 on: May 04, 2014, 09:07:44 AM »
Bump; I'd like to hear some flat-earth "opinions" on this, if there are any at all.
i don't need a signature. go away.

?

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 23256
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2014, 09:18:45 AM »
Asking one question at a time would get you a better response.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2014, 09:27:27 AM »
I think the point he was trying to make is that a few assumptions: universal gravitation, the earth is a round planet, etc. neatly explain not only all those observations but nearly all other observations ever made as well.

So what prompts a person to search for more convoluted explanations that do a poorer job of explaining what we see?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2014, 10:46:06 AM »
Asking one question at a time would get you a better response.
Okay, one question at at time?
How do you explain in a simpler manner the listed observations, using the flat earth model?
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #5 on: May 04, 2014, 10:51:45 AM »
Asking one question at a time would get you a better response.
Okay, one question at at time?
How do you explain in a simpler manner the listed observations, using the flat earth model?
Well, generally, I would say that most of those observations can also be explained in the flat Earth model.
Also, I look out my window, and the Earth seems flat.
Using Occam's Razor, I am inclined to believe that it is how it seems.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 16357
  • Most Prolific Scientist, 2019
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #6 on: May 04, 2014, 10:57:50 AM »
For those who are unaware, let me first state that Occam's razor is the principle that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions, and therefore the simplest, is most often correct. This is a very useful principle in the pseudoscience against science, or flat earth against round earth, debate. Consider the following statements:

...

Now, consider which of the hypotheses is the simplest. Obviously, the round earth. The flat earth "theory" states that each of these statements is either a conspiracy or a blatant lie or another convoluted means of attacking the "truth" of the flat earth.
The flat earth theory states no such thing.
Quote
But the truth is, the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct, and it's clear and simple that the earth is round.
I challenge any flat-earther to provide ten concrete pieces of evidence that the earth is flat, and that the earth being flat is simpler than it being round.
Can you show us that the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct through example? A counter example I can think of off the top of my head would be Mendel's work on genealogy which had to support several assumptions and complexities that were outside the scientific dialogue of the time, thus by your metric making it less "simple" and most likely incorrect. It has also been suggested that such cases are common place. Against Theory talks about this a few times. The mechanic in question is that by necessity great advances in science must be by definition at least partially incoherent with the current scientific dialogue and consequently have a lower empirical basis almost in spite of their "truthiness".
« Last Edit: May 04, 2014, 11:03:11 AM by TheProgrammer »
Quantum Ab Hoc

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #7 on: May 04, 2014, 11:21:58 AM »
For those who are unaware, let me first state that Occam's razor is the principle that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions, and therefore the simplest, is most often correct. This is a very useful principle in the pseudoscience against science, or flat earth against round earth, debate. Consider the following statements:

...

Now, consider which of the hypotheses is the simplest. Obviously, the round earth. The flat earth "theory" states that each of these statements is either a conspiracy or a blatant lie or another convoluted means of attacking the "truth" of the flat earth.
The flat earth theory states no such thing.
Quote
But the truth is, the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct, and it's clear and simple that the earth is round.
I challenge any flat-earther to provide ten concrete pieces of evidence that the earth is flat, and that the earth being flat is simpler than it being round.
Can you show us that the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct through example? A counter example I can think of off the top of my head would be Mendel's work on genealogy which had to support several assumptions and complexities that were outside the scientific dialogue of the time, thus by your metric making it less "simple" and most likely incorrect. It has also been suggested that such cases are common place. Against Theory talks about this a few times. The mechanic in question is that by necessity great advances in science must be by definition at least partially incoherent with the current scientific dialogue and consequently have a lower empirical basis almost in spite of their "truthiness".
No, the flat earth theory does not state it specifically, but any photographic evidence is disregarded as conspiracy.

Regarding an example of Occam's razor, consider Einstein's theory of special relativity compared with Lorentz's theory that ruler's contract and clocks slow down when in motion through the ether.  Einstein's equations for transforming spacetime are the same as Lorentz's equations for transforming rulers and clocks, but Einstein and Poincare recogniszd that the ether could not be detected according to the equations of Lorentz and Maxwell.  By Occam's razor it had to be eliminated.
i don't need a signature. go away.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #8 on: May 04, 2014, 11:43:53 AM »
Quote
Also, I look out my window, and the Earth seems flat.
Using Occam's Razor, I am inclined to believe that it is how it seems.

For one, that isn't actually using Occam's Razor.

For two.......by your logic if I'm in a room with no windows.........I would need to inclined to believe no world exist outside the room.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #9 on: May 04, 2014, 11:48:21 AM »
For those who are unaware, let me first state that Occam's razor is the principle that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions, and therefore the simplest, is most often correct. This is a very useful principle in the pseudoscience against science, or flat earth against round earth, debate. Consider the following statements:

...

Now, consider which of the hypotheses is the simplest. Obviously, the round earth. The flat earth "theory" states that each of these statements is either a conspiracy or a blatant lie or another convoluted means of attacking the "truth" of the flat earth.
The flat earth theory states no such thing.
Quote
But the truth is, the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct, and it's clear and simple that the earth is round.
I challenge any flat-earther to provide ten concrete pieces of evidence that the earth is flat, and that the earth being flat is simpler than it being round.
Can you show us that the simplest hypothesis is almost always correct through example? A counter example I can think of off the top of my head would be Mendel's work on genealogy which had to support several assumptions and complexities that were outside the scientific dialogue of the time, thus by your metric making it less "simple" and most likely incorrect. It has also been suggested that such cases are common place. Against Theory talks about this a few times. The mechanic in question is that by necessity great advances in science must be by definition at least partially incoherent with the current scientific dialogue and consequently have a lower empirical basis almost in spite of their "truthiness".
No, the flat earth theory does not state it specifically, but any photographic evidence is disregarded as conspiracy.

Regarding an example of Occam's razor, consider Einstein's theory of special relativity compared with Lorentz's theory that ruler's contract and clocks slow down when in motion through the ether.  Einstein's equations for transforming spacetime are the same as Lorentz's equations for transforming rulers and clocks, but Einstein and Poincare recogniszd that the ether could not be detected according to the equations of Lorentz and Maxwell.  By Occam's razor it had to be eliminated.
You should read this entire thing. Very interesting.
http://www.teslaphysics.com/files/Detection.pdf


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #10 on: May 04, 2014, 11:49:23 AM »
Quote
Also, I look out my window, and the Earth seems flat.
Using Occam's Razor, I am inclined to believe that it is how it seems.

For one, that isn't actually using Occam's Razor.

For two.......by your logic if I'm in a room with no windows.........I would need to inclined to believe no world exist outside the room.
If you never were able to leave the room, it really wouldn't be at all impossible that there exists no outside world in this scenario.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #11 on: May 04, 2014, 11:55:41 AM »
Quote
If you never were able to leave the room, it really wouldn't be at all impossible that there exists no outside world in this scenario.

And if all you ever did was look out your window.......it really wouldn't be all that impossible that the world is flat.

Thankfully, man has done much more than simply look out his window.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2014, 11:59:16 AM »
Quote
If you never were able to leave the room, it really wouldn't be at all impossible that there exists no outside world in this scenario.

And if all you ever did was look out your window.......it really wouldn't be all that impossible that the world is flat.

Thankfully, man has done much more than simply look out his window.
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #13 on: May 04, 2014, 12:00:45 PM »
Asking one question at a time would get you a better response.
Okay, one question at at time?
How do you explain in a simpler manner the listed observations, using the flat earth model?
Well, generally, I would say that most of those observations can also be explained in the flat Earth model.
Also, I look out my window, and the Earth seems flat.
Using Occam's Razor, I am inclined to believe that it is how it seems.
First of all, I asked not for someone to say they can be explained but rather to explain them.
Second, you are actually using Occam's Razor against you by looking out the window. You are making an assumption (= more complex hypothesis) by assuming the world is flat based on one observation.
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #14 on: May 04, 2014, 12:01:50 PM »
Asking one question at a time would get you a better response.
Okay, one question at at time?
How do you explain in a simpler manner the listed observations, using the flat earth model?
Well, generally, I would say that most of those observations can also be explained in the flat Earth model.
Also, I look out my window, and the Earth seems flat.
Using Occam's Razor, I am inclined to believe that it is how it seems.
First of all, I asked not for someone to say they can be explained but rather to explain them.
Second, you are actually using Occam's Razor against you by looking out the window. You are making an assumption (= more complex hypothesis) by assuming the world is flat based on one observation.
It's a big observation.
Anywhere I will ever go in my life I will see a flat Earth.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #15 on: May 04, 2014, 12:02:52 PM »
Quote
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.

I've never been to the city of Tokyo..........so I guess by your logic Tokyo doesn't exist?

Ever read the Allegory of the Cave? I'd check that out if I were you.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #16 on: May 04, 2014, 12:04:46 PM »
Quote
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.

I've never been to the city of Tokyo..........so I guess by your logic Tokyo doesn't exist?

Ever read the Allegory of the Cave? I'd check that out if I were you.
I have no doubt that Tokyo exists, as I could possibly go there.
I've seen pictures of Tokyo from random people. I've met people who have been to Tokyo, and have a buddy stationed near Tokyo.
The existence of Tokyo is not in question.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #17 on: May 04, 2014, 12:05:01 PM »
Quote
It's a big observation.
Anywhere I will ever go in my life I will see a flat Earth.

Yet there are many observations you can make that prove the world isn't flat.

Sticks and shadows, observing the stars and other celestial bodies in the sky. So on and so forth.

You can see curvature from a plane. You can see pictures and video of earth from space.

You can of course keep your head buried in the same and reject empirical evidence that has existed for a very long time too, if that is your thing.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #18 on: May 04, 2014, 12:07:18 PM »
Quote
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.

I've never been to the city of Tokyo..........so I guess by your logic Tokyo doesn't exist?

Ever read the Allegory of the Cave? I'd check that out if I were you.
I have no doubt that Tokyo exists, as I could possibly go there.
I've seen pictures of Tokyo from random people. I've met people who have been to Tokyo, and have a buddy stationed near Tokyo.
The existence of Tokyo is not in question.
What if anyone who has "been to" or "taken pictures of" Tokyo is just involved in a global conspiracy, and Tokyo really doesn't exist?
This is the argument of flat-earthers with regard to photographic evidence.
By your logic the roundness of the earth is also not in question.
i don't need a signature. go away.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #19 on: May 04, 2014, 12:07:54 PM »
Quote
I have no doubt that Tokyo exists, as I could possibly go there.

Maybe you can't. Maybe it's part of the conspiracy.

You could possibly go to space too, had you wanted to follow that career path.

Quote
I've seen pictures of Tokyo from random people.

I've seen pictures of the earth from space.

Quote
I've met people who have been to Tokyo, and have a buddy stationed near Tokyo.

I've met two astronauts in my life and have a friend that works for NASA.

See......I can do this too.
Quote
The existence of Tokyo is not in question.

The oblate spheroidness of the Earth isn't a question either but it hasn't stopped this forum from flourishing.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • How else would light work?
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #20 on: May 04, 2014, 12:12:42 PM »
Occam's razor is often misinterpreted to mean that the simplest hypothesis is correct.

In truth, it's far from an ironclad law and in any case its purpose is only to help choose one of several otherwise equally strong hypotheses. For example, you hypothesise that the circles in your crops were caused by aliens, you test this hypothesis by watching your fields and seeing who draws the next circle. You see nobody and conclude that it was aliens, invisible aliens!

Occam's razor simply warns against inventing aliens and inventing invisibility just to explain something that was probably just a couple of bored students with string and sticks that you didn't notice. Yes, they both equally explain the crop circles, but one of them requires a whole load of new and otherwise unfounded assumptions. Plus it makes you look like an idiot.
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

th3rm0m3t3r0

  • At least 3 words, please.
  • 4696
  • It's SCIENCE!
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #21 on: May 04, 2014, 12:14:03 PM »
Quote
Maybe you can't. Maybe it's part of the conspiracy.

It's not. Tokyo exists.

Quote
You could possibly go to space too, had you wanted to follow that career path.

Yes, as far as you're told.

Quote
I've seen pictures of the earth from space.

You've seen what you are told are pictures of the Earth from space.

Quote
I've met two astronauts in my life and have a friend that works for NASA.

See......I can do this too.

You've met two people that call themselves astronauts, who I'm sure get paid a lot of money to be astronauts.
You're not very good at doing this.

Quote
The oblate spheroidness of the Earth isn't a question either but it hasn't stopped this forum from flourishing.
It is a question- as I've explained, the Earth looks flat anywhere I can travel.
It is not a question to most because you read it in a book and accept it.
Basic simplistic observations go against the idea, and so I'm inclined to ask some questions.


I don't profess to be correct.
Quote from: sceptimatic
I am correct.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #22 on: May 04, 2014, 12:18:14 PM »
Quote
Maybe you can't. Maybe it's part of the conspiracy.

It's not. Tokyo exists.

How can you say that if you've never been there?
I have yet to see evidence that Lunar Eclipses even exist.  Have you ever seen one?

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #23 on: May 04, 2014, 12:29:37 PM »
Quote
It's not. Tokyo exists.

Yet you have never actually seen it with your own eyes.

Quote
Yes, as far as you're told.

You're right. All those random people that go into the space program and the ones that actually make it are actually part of the conspiracy.

Because that makes sense. Totally. Not paranoid at all.

Quote
You've seen what you are told are pictures of the Earth from space.

And you've seen what you are told are pictures of Tokyo.

Same logic applies here.

Quote
You've met two people that call themselves astronauts, who I'm sure get paid a lot of money to be astronauts.

Yeah, just like it would be no different to meet someone that calls himself a doctor and gets paid a lot of money to be a doctor and trained for years to become a doctor.

Again, same logic applies.

Quote
You're not very good at doing this.

I'm using the same logic and applying it across the board.

You're picking and choosing what is real and what is fake to make in play in accordance with your beliefs.
Quote
It is a question- as I've explained, the Earth looks flat anywhere I can travel.

If you were the only person on the planet.......this would make sense.

The question of the Earth's shape, however, was figured out long before you were born.

Quote
It is not a question to most because you read it in a book and accept it.

Thanks Scepti.
Quote
Basic simplistic observations go against the idea, and so I'm inclined to ask some questions.

Basic simplistic observations, sticks and shadows for example, is how man first learned the earth wasn't flat.

Rejecting evidence simply because it proves you wrong isn't asking questions......it's just burying your head in the sand.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #24 on: May 04, 2014, 12:30:46 PM »
Occam's razor is often misinterpreted to mean that the simplest hypothesis is correct.

In truth, it's far from an ironclad law and in any case its purpose is only to help choose one of several otherwise equally strong hypotheses. For example, you hypothesise that the circles in your crops were caused by aliens, you test this hypothesis by watching your fields and seeing who draws the next circle. You see nobody and conclude that it was aliens, invisible aliens!

Occam's razor simply warns against inventing aliens and inventing invisibility just to explain something that was probably just a couple of bored students with string and sticks that you didn't notice. Yes, they both equally explain the crop circles, but one of them requires a whole load of new and otherwise unfounded assumptions. Plus it makes you look like an idiot.
To quote Sceptimatic, I don't profess to be correct. I said "almost always correct", and "usually correct", but not "always correct."
i don't need a signature. go away.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #25 on: May 04, 2014, 12:36:18 PM »
It's a moot point anyway.

Occam's razor is meant to help with choosing a hypothesis.

Round earth isn't a hypothesis. It isn't a theory. It's a fact.

Flat earth hasn't even made it to the hypothesis stage. It's a wild notion, at best.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #26 on: May 04, 2014, 12:42:41 PM »
I should probably create a new thread about the fact that Tokyo does not exist.
i don't need a signature. go away.

Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #27 on: May 04, 2014, 12:43:00 PM »
Quote
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.

I've never been to the city of Tokyo..........so I guess by your logic Tokyo doesn't exist?

Ever read the Allegory of the Cave? I'd check that out if I were you.
I have no doubt that Tokyo exists, as I could possibly go there.
I've seen pictures of Tokyo from random people. I've met people who have been to Tokyo, and have a buddy stationed near Tokyo.
The existence of Tokyo is not in question.
this could go on for ever, have you been to Australia etc.  How do you explain distances being consistent with a round earth?

*

V

  • 304
  • icosatetrachoron
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #28 on: May 04, 2014, 12:48:00 PM »
Quote
As a man, with my own two eyes, I have only ever seen a flat Earth.

I've never been to the city of Tokyo..........so I guess by your logic Tokyo doesn't exist?

Ever read the Allegory of the Cave? I'd check that out if I were you.
I have no doubt that Tokyo exists, as I could possibly go there.
I've seen pictures of Tokyo from random people. I've met people who have been to Tokyo, and have a buddy stationed near Tokyo.
The existence of Tokyo is not in question.
this could go on for ever, have you been to Australia etc.  How do you explain distances being consistent with a round earth?
<sarcasm>It's very clear that anything and anyone involved with the measuring of distances is involved in a massive global conspiracy to hide the truth.</sarcasm>
i don't need a signature. go away.

*

RealScientist

  • 417
  • Science does not care for Earth's shape
Re: Occam's razor and the flat earth "theory"
« Reply #29 on: May 04, 2014, 06:21:51 PM »
Occam's razor is often misinterpreted to mean that the simplest hypothesis is correct.

In truth, it's far from an ironclad law and in any case its purpose is only to help choose one of several otherwise equally strong hypotheses. For example, you hypothesise that the circles in your crops were caused by aliens, you test this hypothesis by watching your fields and seeing who draws the next circle. You see nobody and conclude that it was aliens, invisible aliens!

Occam's razor simply warns against inventing aliens and inventing invisibility just to explain something that was probably just a couple of bored students with string and sticks that you didn't notice. Yes, they both equally explain the crop circles, but one of them requires a whole load of new and otherwise unfounded assumptions. Plus it makes you look like an idiot.
To quote Sceptimatic, I don't profess to be correct. I said "almost always correct", and "usually correct", but not "always correct."
I am very confused by this answer. Occam's Razor is never about being correct or always correct.

This whole FES is the best example ever of when not to use Occam's Razor. If you do not have two hypothesis of equal predictive strength, you cannot use Occam's Razor at all. When one hypothesis explains just about everything (except some observations at the galactic level or near black holes) and another does not even correctly predict the movements of the Sun, Moon and planets, (something that even the Babylonians and Mayas could do very well), there is no need for Occam's Razor. In fact, in this case there is no use or applicability for Occam's Razor.

When you have two hypothesis of equal predicting power, Occam's Razor is the only guide you can use to choose one. When one hypothesis is absolutely superior to another, Occam's Razor is just the wrong tool for a problem that is already solved.