I have no bone to pick on that score.
But people bat Willam of Ockham's rule of thumb for *THEOLOGICAL*
arguments (check the source or a decent historical survey some time;
the guy was a churchmouse as most academics had to be at the time)
as if it were some sort of law of nature.
It's not. It's just a heuristic. And, as with many heuristics, it
has domains of applicability and domains of inapplicability.
And when it doesn't work, if you're staring at the ruler instead of
the thin being measured, you should be prepared for disappointment.
I like falsifiability just fine. It is a concept that is 'way 'way
newer than Occam's Razor.
MMB