1. I watched a documentary where a cartoonist for the major newspapers of my country, was interviewed. The cartoonist said that he often had people accusing him of bias. Some would accuse him of always being supportive of one political party, and in the same week, others would accuse him of always being supportive of an opposing party. The Letters Editor of the Sydney Morning Herald once wrote that he experienced similar things. As human behaviour expert Alan Pease said in his book ‘Talk Language’, "we tend to hear what we want to hear and see what we want to see."

2. There are many people of many religions, who believe various things because a series of facts seem to ‘add up’ to a degree that seems beyond the realms of coincidence. Any religious person can probably think of examples of this, where people conclude that something is best explained as the hand of their god moving, so I wont list any examples here. But guess what? Coincidences do happen, and so do unlikely events such as flipping a coin and getting five heads in a row. You can explore this by studying the mathematical science of probability and by reading books by sceptics and critical thinkers like Carl Sagan (but I wouldn’t conclude that there’s no such thing as the supernatural). A classic website that illustrates how facts can add up to an amazing degree that seems beyond coincidence, is this one: http://www.esquilax.com/baywatch/, which believe it or not, does a good job of arguing that the star of Baywatch is the Antichrist.

3. Frustrated with how she wasn’t able to convince me that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society are God’s one true organisation, the JW I had been debating stared at me as though I was an evil person while she asked "Why do you hate the name ‘Jehovah’ ?" She believed that ‘Jehovah’ is God’s only correct name, and that mainstream Christians such as myself deliberately suppressed this supposed 'truth'. I replied that I didnt hate that word. She then responded that many of those she had witnessed to did hate it, and that she could see hatred of the term in the eyes of the many pastors she had talked to. I reflected on how I had heard preachers use the word ‘Jehovah’, and that I had used it myself. Although those outside her organisation use the word very infrequently, there is no reason to conclude that they hate it. I was now clearly aware that there are reasonably intelligent people around who are convinced about things for which they have only incredibly flimsy evidence. Aparently one of the main things that the Greek philosopher Socretes is remembered for is encouraging the testing of your beliefs and philosophies to find whether they hold water. He was on to something!

4. I attended an evangelistic meeting where the evangelist gave several reasons to be a Christian. I thought the best apologetic he gave was that people tend to say "Jesus" as a swear word. I reflected that it’s as though we all know deep down that Jesus is the real God. As the evangelist said "how often do you hear people swear ‘Bhudda’ or any other god’s name." It wasn’t until years later that I found that the religious words that people use to swear with, vary from place to place. In Rome (a very Catholic place), people reportedly swear by often using the name of Mary or a Catholic saint. I finally concluded that in my country, people probably only use the name "Jesus" because that’s the God they are most familiar with.

5. Aparently a study undertaken in 2005 found that around half the African-American's surveyed believed that the cure to AIDS is being withheld, and 15% believed that HIV was created by the CIA/US government to control the African-American population. But according to Dr Karl S. Kruszelnicki (Australia's media personality "Dr Karl"), scientists have only devoloped the ability to create a complete virus only around the turn of this century, and he says there is a preserved blood sample from 1959 that proves that HIV was infecting people back then. Dr Karl says the genetic code of HIV shows that the disease moved to humans from chimps in the first half of the 20th century. (Good Weekend, 3 Feb. 2007 - a Sydney Morning Herald supplement)

6. Then there are the myths which spread for years, decades, or centuries before they die. I was a victim to some of the Christian myths and hoaxes such as the ‘Nasa’ missing-day tract, Modern People News film warning, the Eye of the Needle etc (reported: Challenge Weekly 1/10/97). I also willingly believed some of the secular urban myths, EG that The Great Wall of China was visible from the Moon with the naked eye. Here’s an old classic that takes the cake though. According to Carl Sagan’s book The Demon Haunted World, in the ninth century people started talking of how Constantine willed the Western Roman Empire to the Pope. Apparently, by the eleventh century, popes were regularly referring to this donation. But it wasn’t until the year 1440, that it was demonstrated the supposed donation never happened. A bit of error-checking can uncover some long-term myths that otherwise simply continue to spread. Newspapers too have been guilty of widely disseminating untruths, due to lack of confirming the facts. (Example here and some analysis of a journalistic flaw here).

7. A classic I learnt of in science class at high school was the following. Before cars were invented, people used to use horses a lot. And with many horses around, horse hair could often be seen on the ground. Well, people noticed that after it rains, worms squirm around on the ground, and they concluded that the rain turned the horse hairs into worms! Apparently, "spontaneous generation" theories such as this one were quite popular during the Middle Ages. If only someone had bothered to do some serious research... But are we any better in the 21st century? Many people believe that water always rotates down plug holes in the same direction depending on which hemisphere you are in. Others believe it's very dangerous to go swimming immediately after eating a meal.

8. In the November 1997 edition of the Australian magazine 'Biblical Fundamentalist', the author wrote about why, rather than any other version, the King James Bible is the only authentic "Word of God in English." He offered several reasons of why he felt this is true. Firstly that other versions "dont 'sound right' or 'ring true' in our hearts; simply because there is no witness of the Holy Spirit that they are His words." The author continues "When someone comes along and tries to point out a 'mistake' in our KJV we dont always know the answer, but we conclude that either they are wrong or God is wrong and we prefer to believe God. Our logic is simple and childlike." Although that last sentence is perhaps a misapplication of Mk 10:15, I think it's a good description of their attitude. This example illustrates to me that trusting in a feeling that you think originates with the Holy Spirit, is a hit-and-miss method of getting truth. (See this external link to read why the 'King James Only' argument is without foundation.)

9. In much the same way as people have an amazing capacity to be over-the-top in seeing only positive things in their ideology, they can also be over the top in seeing bad things in the ideologies of others. I went into an unusual looking bookshop in the city and noticed that it had several books on the shelves that were promoting the idea of abortion. When the retailer approached me I asked him about why they seemed to have a pro-abortion section. He said that the bookshop was socialist and was supportive of women’s rights. He said that anti-abortionists had an ulterior motive. He said that the real motivation of anti-abortionists was to keep women ‘in their place.’ As a conservative Christian who had read a lot of pro-life material, I knew that the real motivation of your average pro-lifer wasnt focused on the women, but rather was focused on the rights of the unborn. I had uncovered another example of an ideology growing beyond the facts and into fiction. You can see this on a more international scale too. I was shocked when a Lebonese friend told me that he thought that it probably was the CIA rather than Afgan Muslims who were responsible for the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks in USA. I had seen in the media that Muslims in the Middle East had suggested that Jews were probably responsible, but I simply assumed that they didnt have access to the media that we have. How could my friend, living in Australia, suggest such a thing? Aparently there are have even been Americans who suggest the Jews did it. According to Lipset and Raab (The Politics of Unreason, p. 139), in the USA during the 1920s, one large organisation argued that Jews started World War 1, that Jews were behind communism everywhere, that Jews had a systematic plan to limit economic opportunities for Christians, and even suggested that Jews had united with Catholics in a plan to control the USA's press and economy. Such enthno-religious conspiracy theories seem to be widespread. In Pakistan, even as recently as the year 2000, there has been talk of a Jewish-Hindu conspiracy within the US government. ... On an only-slightly-relevant note... The acting manager of an "anarchist bookshop" in Sydney told me that he has found that "anarchism breeds paranoia" in its adherents. I can see how that would be true of anyone who believes in widespread conspiracy.

10. David Irving is an interesting case because he had a number of academics and journalists fooled. He's an author and historian and is now known as an infamous Holocaust denier who has claimed that the Nazis didnt commit many of the attrocities that they are generally reputed to have committed. FHM magazine (Aust., Sept. 2001) reported that despite mainstream historians still holding to standard understandings of what the Nazis did, Holocaust denial is alive and well. Irving and his teachings surprisingly enjoyed limited but increasing respect until 1996 when he took Deborah Lipstadt, a critic of his and author of "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory" to court in England. The result was that both Irving's teachings and general historical understandings of the Holocaust effectively went on trial. Irving lost. According to The Australian, the judge concluded that Irving was anti-semitic, a "pro-Nazi polemicist", that he had lied in court and had knowingly distorted historical evidence to support his threories. A book was written about this saga by D.D. Guttenplan, called The Holocaust on Trial. Guttenplan makes some interesting statements. He says that Irving requires 100% incontrovertible evidence before accepting that an aspect of the Holocaust really occurred. But he says Irving accepts without hestiation anything that casts Hitler in a positive light. Im sure such a one-eyed approach is also part of similar dodgy views of history. Guttenplan says that it's "doubtful the judges arguements will themselves make any impact on the paranoid adherents of Holocaust denial or other believers in Jewish conspiracy. Their views are, by their very nature, impervious to reasoned judgement." Even the president of Iran has made comments that the Holocaust basically didnt happen (although he later softened his stance). Aparently Irving is now hailed by Neo-Nazis as a martyr to their cause.

11. In July 1999, many Japanese prepared for the end of the world. Why? Because Nostradamus, a sixteenth century seer, supposedly predicted that’s when the end would arrive. Helping to make the theory more real to the Japanese was the fact that Japan’s neighbours, Korea, had been at battle in the lead up to the date, and had sent a missile flying over Japan during the previous year. Some say that Nostradamus correctly predicted many events, which have now come to pass. Others say that his predictions are so non-specific and open to interpretation that there’s little reason to believe he had any supernatural gifting.

12. Shortly after September 11th 2001, when America was attacked by terrorists who effectively destroyed New York's Twin Towers, the number of visitors to this page skyrocketed to over 100 per day. People were searching for information on Nostrodamas and his name was the number one most searched for item at some search-engines, after an email relating to him was widely circulated. The email quoted a passage supposedly written by Nostradamus, inferring that he predicted the recent terrorist attacks. There were apparently several variations of the email, but someone sent me the following popular version:
> From Nostradamus approx 500 years ago ....
>
> "In the year of the new century and nine months,
> From the sky will come a great King of Terror ...
> The sky will burn at forty-five degrees.
> Fire approaches the great new city ..."
>
> also....
>
> "In the City of God there will be a great thunder.
> Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress
> endures, the great leader will
> succumb." "The third big war will begin when
> the big city is burning."
>
> Nostradamus
> 1654. (emphasis mine).
The wierd part of all this is that Nostrodamus didnt write the section above that I have displayed in bold tyeface. Rather it was written in 1997 by a sceptic named Niel Marshall, who set out to prove how non-specific predictions can be interpreted to mean any of a number of things. After the terrorism of Sept 11 2001, Marshall's point was proven correct! You can read what the Marshall wrote on his website here: http://www.urbanlegends.com/ulz/xmarshall.html

See these external links for advice on how to determine whether a story in an email is truth or fiction:
http://www.truthorfiction.com/signs.htm
http://www.urbanlegends.com

Other external links about credulity:
Why people believe wierd things (a book review)

Dont believe everything you hear! Even when it comes from seemingly reliable sources!

So Who Can You Trust?

Return to Chapter Four

Main Page