In this instance, nothing more than the parent reinforcing its point by saying, “it could be [whatever random possibilities] ... we don’t know.” The parent is not claiming to know possible outcomes, but specifically calling out that we don’t know what the outcomes will or could be.

Parent doesn't "Claim he knows". He said "it could be [some positive outcome as opposed to the statistically prevalent negative predictions]"

You see this faulty reasoning a lot when discussing religion:

We can't know or understand God any more than a cockroach can understand an iPhone - but we will now tell you all about God, what he wants from us, and how to obtain the everlasting rewards that he has promised to believers.