You believe that magic ad-hoc random variables are more plausible? And that somehow for whatever non-causal (so magic) reason they follow the same probability distribution?
This is clearly epistemologically weaker, but seduce more the wishful thinker mind.
I think for these people the detail just doesn't matter to them. They see near random behavior which is currently impossible to model and they shrug their shoulders and call it a magic, ad-hoc random variable.
And to a degree, they have a point: Does it really matter if we can predict the exact time and location of an alpha particle as is exits a black hole as hawking radiation? What good does modeling this phenomenon accurately give us?
At some point all that "nah what's the advantage of knowing that exactly?" would pile up and we throw away to many questions of how things work, limitting progress. I think that these kind of things are what scientists want to know. "We" want to know everything and how it works, no?
