The fundamental question of rationality is: why do you believe what you believe? As a rationalist, you can't just pull probabilities out of your rear end. And now here's the kicker: that includes the probability of your model being wrong. The latter must, paradoxically but necessarily, be part of your model itself. If you're uncertain, there has to be a reason you're uncertain; if you expect to change your mind later, you should go ahead and change your mind now.

You're just telling people to pull different probabilities out of their rear end. Framing the other guy's model with 'rear endeness' doesn't make your model any less so. Your model must include information about the part of the universe that is komponisto and more generally about human psychology. Your model appears to make poor predictions about the likelyhood that human beliefs are well founded and so, were it convenient, I would bet against such predictions.

It may be complicated and my model is certainly not detailed but nor is it especially vaguer than it should be given the information I have available.