Being fooled doesn't make one an idiot or "stupid." It means that one lacks the skills to properly evaluate areas outside of their education and knowledge. This is a problem for scientists who feel they are somehow qualified to speak on areas outside of their education--- they believe they are competent to discourse on various subjects because they are competent in other subjects.

Case in point is Stanford Research Institute testing the fraud Uri Geller. Even after world-wide exposure of him being not only a con-artist and a fraud, but also a theif (see Randi's _Flim- Flam!_ concerning Geller stealing watches from a jewlry store), the two scientists at SRI still insist they were not fooled and that Geller is "psychic." They believe themselves to be competent observers, and the massive evidence the demonstrates they were fooled only causes them to deny their incompetence the louder.

The point is, the two SRI scientists are extremely competent in their fields (laser technology). That competence does not qualify them to test "psychic" abilities.

That's why Creationists who are also "scientists" tend to be educated in fields other than biology, geology, and related fields (though there are exceptions, due to faith). D. Gish as one example is educated in hydrodynamics. He is qualified to build sewer systems, dikes, flood control systems, etc. He has demonstrated hundreds of times that he is incompetent and uneducated in evolutionary theory, biology, geology, etc. Yet that doesn't seem to bother him any.

The author of Salvation for Sale, Gerry Straub, denotes three types of faith. Paraphrases:

• Number one is "I'll believe it no matter how much evidence there is against its validity." This type of faith is what Creationists demonstrate--- no matter how many facts are stacked against them, their faith in their falsity is unshakeable. It is retained no matter how much contradictory evidence is aquired.

• Number two is "I'll believe it until it is proven untrue." This type of faith is the pink invisible hippo kind: "if one cannot prove pink invisible hippos do NOT exist, I'll believe that they do." This is what most theists demonstrate. It includes Pascal's Wager.

• Number three is "Hypotheses based upon evidence." This is the only type of faith where evidence exists, and yet not total and complete evidence as to be without doubt. This is the type of faith that scientists demonstrate. One example is having faith that red lights at a cross-walk will deter on-comming cars from running over one--- direct observation and repeated experience has demonstrated that green lights for pedestrians and red lights for on-comming cars at cross-walks are sufficient deterants for being run over, and yet it DOES happen now and then. One has faith that one will not be run over. One has faith that the airplane one is in will not crash. One has faith that currency one receives is exchangable for goods and services. (This type of faith can also mean "The universe is not out to fool me.") If it can be demonstrated that street lights are not safe to believe, and that airplanes cannot fly without crashing, scientists will abandon thier faith in those things. The hallmark of type three faith is that it is abandoned upon contradictory evidence.

Go Back