But in order for them to even give a meaningful probability estimate, they'll need to spend years actually studying the relevant physics and mathematics. It doesn't matter how eloquently you explain MW - the Universe doesn't run on rhetoric.
If you ask people about MW versus CI, from their perspective it's no different from asking "does the glibbleflop spriel or does it just florl?"
I thought it to be a nice illustration: Dawkins vs. Tyson This is a 2-minute-excerpt of "Beyond Belief", where Tyson accuses Dawkins of "the first type of winning an argument". (But his answer is no more than "You're right. But some people are worse".)