Poor idea in my view.<p>Going from "I have a claim that this entity exists", and when this can't be shown, adding the next claim: "There is an alternate reality/dimension/magistrate and we cannot see into it, and there is where this entity exists" adds yet another thing not being able to be proven, and sounds to me very much like Russels "and it is so small that our telescopes can't see it". So now you have two "teapots" stacked on top of each other that needs verification of some sort. Soon, Occam kicks in.<p>And no, "equally likely" is not a good statistical comparison of probabilities. One has observations that required dark matter/energy, the other.. not so much.<p>Sounds to me more like: 'all' scientists were once baffled by this, and also by that, so they are equal. Since they figured out parts the mystery of one of them, the other must be as real as the first.