Occam’s razor is a problem solving principle which dictates that among conflicting hypotheses, the one with the fewer assumptions should be true.
Religionists conveniently use this principle to assume that the ‘God did it’ assumption as an answer to the question of existence is valid, since that would be the lesser assumption and therefore true.
Why this is retarded:
1. Who determines the number or severity of assumptions in any question? ‘God did it’ as a lesser or less complicated assumption is a matter of opinion. It also disregards the multitude of questions (and therefore assumptions) that such an answer would generate. A random Big Bang or multiverse assumption seems simpler, more grounded and more harmonious to me.
2. Later discoveries have disproved Occam’s razor. For example, the easiest assumption for the explanation of lightning is the wrath of God. The true proven cause is something more complicated. Occam fails again and again. I could go on for hours with such cases.
3. Occam’s razor is a dangerously bold and complicated assumption in itself.