The Nature of Science 13of whom we can have no reliable knowledge, is of no importance to us.” As Pennock (1999:
192) points out, this may describe the fundamentalist deity who is constantly intervening
in nature and performing miracles, but not the deity of theistic evolutionists who are will-
ing to say God used evolution as his tool to modify nature. Nor does it jibe with the Deistic
view (the religious attitude of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and the Founding Fathers
that the fundamentalists like to quote), which claims that God created the universe long ago
but no longer interferes with his creation. In addition, many religious believers (including
many Christians) view God as a universal life force or mystical unity, not an omniscient,
omnipotent old man with a beard who constantly meddles with the universe. To Johnson, all
these people (including the Founding Fathers) are virtual atheists. Apparently, if they don’t
believe in an activist deity, they don’t qualify as being religious!
Science, Pseudoscience, and Baloney Detection
Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts
can be winnowed from deep nonsense.
—Carl SaganThere’s a sucker born every minute.
—Phineas T. BarnumScience may provide some of the most powerful explanations of the universe we have and
may have provided humans with the benefits of modern civilization, but people still have
an ambivalent attitude toward science. They readily accept most of its benefits, but they are
easily suckered into believing “weird things,” or what is known as pseudoscience, as well.
Pseudoscience tries to masquerade as science (knowing the prestige that we now attach to
scientific things), but when you examine the claims closely, they do not hold up to scientific
scrutiny. Humans appreciate many of the advantages of living in the scientific age, but appar-
ently they also have a deep-felt need for answers to questions that science cannot answer,
but for which pseudoscience will willingly sell them an answer. Sometimes these beliefs
are harmless, but often they involve the pseudoscience practitioner swindling the gullible
victims out of valuable things, such as their time, energy, and money. Some pseudoscientists
are clearly con artists, while others truly believe in their lies, but they will take your money
just the same. Unfortunately, there are aspects of pseudoscience that are not just expensive
but deadly to the follower. These parasites prey on people in all cultures and all walks of life,
feeding the need for the mystical and miraculous, yet causing more harm than the little bit of
psychological good feeling and reassurance that they may temporarily provide.
Ironically, most humans are already equipped with a skeptical filter for such con art-
ists in many parts of life. When we bargain for items, or negotiate a price or a contract, we
expect the bargaining to be somewhat adversarial and tricky. We are constantly on the look-
out for someone who might cheat or shortchange us. We are bombarded with commercials
everywhere we go, yet our skeptical filters tend to screen out most commercial appeals, just
like a good spam filter on our computer keeps our email from being overwhelmed by junk.
Caveat emptor—“let the buyer beware”—is a slogan we normally live by in such negotiations.
Yet when it comes to claims that appeal to our sense of mystery, or to our need to connect