Yujiri's First Law: The more distinct proofs someone claims to have for something, the more likely they are to be wrong.
There are 5 reasons why this must be true:
It must be true because it's associated with other true things. Think about it: you're reading this law on my site, and I'm generally right about things, which means you should expect that I'm right in the future. Therefore my law is true.
It's true because if you deny it, then you're saying someone could make something true just by claiming to have an arbitrarily large number of proofs.
It's true because obviously, someone who knows they're wrong is incentivized to make up lots of bogus proofs to make their case appear stronger at a quick glance (and to discourage rational people responding, since they'd have to read and deal with all of them).
It's true because if you don't believe that having a lot of claimed proofs makes someone likely to be wrong, then you'll end up having to make detailed arguments against people with a lot of claimed proofs. This will take a lot of time and you won't have as much time left to focus on the more reasonable opponents, and you won't be as effective as furthering your goals or spreading your ideas. Therefore, having a lot of claimed proofs makes them likely to be wrong.
You can see empirical examples. For a super extreme one, there's a book titled "200 Proofs Earth is Not a Spinning Ball". You can't argue with empirical demonstration.
Obviously, if I have that many arguments, they must all be bullshit.