Reformed views of a nuclear physicist
Hume's only defect was that he was unaware of Bayes' Theorem
Let's see, Thomas Bayes lived from 1701–1761; David Hume lived from 1711 – 1776. Bayes' Theorem was introduced to the Royal Society in 1763. I seriously doubt Hume never heard of it.
Just FYI, I've heard William Lane Craig say something similar in a debate with Bart Ehrman, although he obviously would draw very different conclusions from Carrier's. IIRC, Ehrman pulled out Hume to explain why there simply couldn't be evidence for the resurrection (miracles are automatically the least likely explanation, you see) and Craig pointed out that Bayesian probability says otherwise, provided that there is good reason to believe that God exists.
It is seems to be the accepted wisdom that Hume's arguments undermine religious belief. However, since Hume was mainly arguing against various notions of causality, i've always thought he was undermining Science as much as anything else thus making miracles neither more nor less likely on the basis of his own logic. I was interested to watch a clip on YouTube by John Lennox making this very same point but in a much more eloquent manner.
Kilo, you're unhinged. You need help. Seek it before it's too late. Seriously.