As a logical principle, Occam's razor would demand that scientists accept the simplest possible theoretical explanation for existing data. However, science has shown repeatedly that future data often supports more complex theories than existing data.
Science prefers the simplest explanation that is consistent with the data available at a given time, but the simplest explanation may be ruled out as new data become available.
There is little empirical evidence that the world is actually simple or that simple accounts are more likely than complex ones to be true.
There are examples where Occam's razor would have picked the wrong theory given the available data
. Simplicity principles are useful philosophical preferences for choosing a more likely theory from among several possibilities that are each consistent with available data. A single instance of Occam's razor picking a wrong theory falsifies the razor as a general principle.
Michael Lee and othersprovide cases where a parsimonious approach does not guarantee a correct conclusion and, if based on incorrect working hypotheses or interpretations of incomplete data, may even strongly support a false conclusion.