Occam's Razor Supports that Hans Niemann did not cheat against Magnus, or in OTB in general.

You're conversing with an intellectually dishonest person. Don't waste your time.

If you are counting posts, maybe...Crusader and Rook tend to post a lot.

My count here is Occam's Razor falling Hans' way 7 times, Magnus' way 16 times by poster opinion.  Which seems to be in line with the assumptions of the chess world in general, 2 to 1 against Niemann being the new Fischer.

Saying someone didn't cheat OTB is not saying they are fischer. 

I don't understand why anyone is investing too much emotional energy into defending one position or another.

That and the search for purpose in a comfortable but atomised society where material needs are largely met. Arguing over public figures (secular gods) who don't know they exist fills a spiritual void. It can be observed across the internet and is fascinating anthropologically.

No. It is saying Niemann is the GOAT. That is, the new Giulio Cesare Polerio!

If you cannot follow logic and connect the dots, maybe.

If you believe that Niemann's meteoric rise and his beating Carlsen twice in a row with the black pieces is perfectly legit (the FTX game is *much* more suspect than the Sinquefield game, btw), and if you buy his "chess speaks for itself", "all the top players are going to look like idiots" and "it was such a ridiculous miracle that I studied that opening line" demeanor is justified because he's just so talented...then you are definitely putting him in Fischer territory, performance-wise and "he's abrasive and immature but that's okay because he's brilliant"-wise.  

The problem is, he's no Fischer.

"Niemann is a false prophet, death to the infidels."

Tell me how his game against Magnus looked suspicious to you, because top GMs generally disagree that he cheated against Magnus at the Sf. cup. 

Notice how @CrusaderKing1 is adept at arguing in circles like religious zealots do. "It says so in the Bible."

Your obsession with religion is unhealthy. 

Reading comprehension ....

After reading all these comments, the most striking thing is that we've never seen a real true genius emerge to overthrow all chess players. I'm talking about an autistic savant with Asperberger's syndrome. Some of these can recite PI to a hundred thousand digits, and then recite it backward. Luckily (I think) most of these turn towards physics other sciences, but it would be a wonder to see one turn to chess. They say the greatest computer chess rating is about 3500, far higher than Magnus Carlsen. It would be interesting to see a savant with asperger's challenge that. Google it on YouTube. There are a lot of leading scientists who see these child geniuses with Asperger's as the next step on humanity's evolution ladder. 

Religion is a secondary issue but due to your low IQ you only have a superficial interpretation of things. My interest is the psychological propensity humans have for revering gods of various kinds. Conspiracists have the same type of brains. They believe an evil cabal (the devil) stands between them and utopia (heaven). If the "devil" can finally be revealed to be the "true" hand behind 9/11 or the Kennedy assassination (for example) then he will be smote and they can enter the kingdom of heaven.

From an evolutionary perspective these traits seem to have been selected for, probably because they provide some kind of survival advantage.

Top GMs generally disagree that Magnus played a good game there.  That does not equate to them thinking Hans does not cheat OTB.  Ask those same players how they feel about Niemann's win over Carlsen at the FTX Crypto event. 

It doesn't really matter if Niemann cheated in the Sinquefield Magnus game.  All that matters if whether Niemann is cheating OTB at all in this timeframe, during his ratings rise.

They possibly would be if the masses valued high intelligence but they don't. They value the next filtered selfie they can upload to Instagram and stuff like the Kardashians. Our political "leaders" from across the spectrum are emotional reactionaries. I would love to be ruled by extremely high IQ cold rationalists but it will never happen because it's not rewarded enough socially in the way superficial charm is.

Calling someone low IQ repeatedly does not make it true. 

Again, your obsession with bringing religion into non-religious conversations is astounding. 

Then why didn't Magnus withdraw from the Sinquefield tournament before he lost to Hans? If he suspected Hans as a cheater, then why did he play until he lost? Then to add insult to injury, his loss was very likely a fair and square loss.

If Magnus would have withdrawn from tournaments before he lost to Hans, I'd actually probably agree there is some merit to his cries.

However, deciding you won't play someone after you lose is a whole different ball game. 

I am waiting for someone to respond saying, "I have been following Hans since the year 2000!"

Me. The first I ever heard about him was that video of him complaining about 5 dollars for a charity event. I couldn't believe someone could be that selfish. I know it was a very small event with a very small prize fund, but more importantly it was a chance for him to show good will. Make some good PR.  It seemed like only weeks after that the cheating scandal broke. So when I heard about that I thought "after seeing what kind of person he is, Hans down, he cheated".