The Fudge Factor replaces Occam's Razor after scientific consensus votes it in. The matter is now considered settled.
According to Wikipedia :
1¬)
Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor: Latin: novacula Occami; or law of parsimony: Latin: lex parsimoniae) is the problem-solving principle that states that "Entities should not be multiplied without necessity."[1][2] The idea is attributed to English Franciscan friar William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), a scholastic philosopher and theologian who used a preference for simplicity to defend the idea of divine miracles. It is sometimes paraphrased by a statement like "the simplest solution is most likely the right one". Occam's razor says that when presented with competing hypotheses that make the same predictions, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions,[3] and it is not meant to be a way of choosing between hypotheses that make different predictions.
Occam's razor (also Ockham's razor or Ocham's razor: Latin: novacula Occami; or law of parsimony: Latin: lex parsimoniae) is the problem-solving principle that states that "Entities should not be multiplied without necessity."[1][2] The idea is attributed to English Franciscan friar William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), a scholastic philosopher and theologian who used a preference for simplicity to defend the idea of divine miracles. It is sometimes paraphrased by a statement like "the simplest solution is most likely the right one". Occam's razor says that when presented with competing hypotheses that make the same predictions, one should select the solution with the fewest assumptions,[3] and it is not meant to be a way of choosing between hypotheses that make different predictions.
Similarly, in science, Occam's razor is used as an abductive heuristic in the development of theoretical models rather than as a rigorous arbiter between candidate models.[4][5] In the scientific method, Occam's razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result; the preference for simplicity in the scientific method is based on the falsifiability criterion. For each accepted explanation of a phenomenon, there may be an extremely large, perhaps even incomprehensible, number of possible and more complex alternatives. Since one can always burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypotheses to prevent them from being falsified, simpler theories are preferable to more complex ones because they are more testable.[6][7][8
... BUT THAT WAS THEN
 |
| Ever vigilant cosmologists and climatologists called a snap press briefing to clear up potential misunderstandings |
... NOW. 2¬) Also from Wikipedia
A fudge factor is an ad hoc quantity or element introduced into a calculation, formula or model in order to make it fit observations or expectations. Also known as a "Correction Coefficient" which is defined by:
Examples include Einstein's Cosmological Constant, dark energy, the initial proposals of dark matter and inflation.[1]
Above: Michio Kaku confesses modern theoretical physics does not use the scientific method.
Examples in science
Some quantities in scientific theory are set arbitrarily according to measured results rather than by calculation (for example, Planck's constant). However, in the case of these fundamental constants, their arbitrariness is usually explicit. To suggest that other calculations may include a "fudge factor" may suggest that the calculation has been somehow tampered with to make results give a misleadingly good match to experimental data.Cosmological constant
In theoretical physics, when Einstein originally tried to produce a general theory of relativity, he found that the theory seemed to predict the gravitational collapse of the universe: it seemed that the universe should either be expanding or collapsing, and to produce a model in which the universe was static and stable (which seemed to Einstein at the time to be the "proper" result), he introduced an expansionist variable (called the Cosmological Constant), whose sole purpose was to cancel out the cumulative effects of gravitation. He later called this, "the biggest blunder of my life."[2]
CLIMATOLOGY DID VERY WELL TO COME IN SECOND PLACE WITH AROUND 65% OF THE DISCIPLINE TURNING OUT TO BE MODELED ON FUDGE, A DECLINE FROM 85% WHEN THE HOCKEY STICK MODEL DOMINATED TO THE CURRENT CMIP6
PAST EXAMPLES OF THE SUCCESS OF THE FUDGE FACTOR IN CLIMATE SCIENCE ARE ARCHIVED HERE.
PAST EXAMPLES OF THE SUCCESS OF THE FUDGE FACTOR GENERALLY IN SCIENCE ARE STILL LEANING TOWARDS THE DOMINANCE OF CLIMATE SCIENCE,THEY ARE ALSO ACHIVED, YOU CAN FIND THEM HERE.
CLIMATOLOGY COULD NOT MATCH COSMOLOGY IN THE END, COSMOLOGY PROVIDED ITS OWN MATHEMATICS TO PROVE THEIR 96% FUDGE FACTOR CLAIM!
COSMOLOGY AND ASTROPHYSICS ARE NOT ABOUT TO LET THE CLIMATE SCIENTISTS OUTDO THEM, SO THEY HAVE CREATED THEIR STANDARD COSMOLOGICAL MODEL CALLED THE LAMBDA-CDM MODEL. THIS IS A WONDER TO BEHOLD AND BY THEIR OWN ESTIMATIONS THEIR MODEL YEILDS A UNIVERSE THAT IS A STAGGERING 96% PURE FUDGE FACTOR. YOU CAN FIND IT RIGHT HERE.