Trust the Experts?

“No shoes, no shirt, no service.”

Some businesses still retain these signs that started popping up in the 1960s and ’70s. Back then, the hippies took pride in being antiestablishment and throwing off societal norms—and clothing. Their countercultural lifestyle and appearance earned them much ire, insomuch that they were unwelcome in many places.

Fast forward 50 years, and Christians now find themselves in the antiestablishment category, standing squarely against mainstream culture which is hostile to Christ and his truth. While we may not be removed from businesses because of our lack of clothing (at least I hope not), we sense that we’re not always welcome in society. Rather than encouraging shoes and shirts, signs today pointedly proclaim messages such as, “Trust the experts!”

The claim that we should “trust the experts” assures us that, on complex issues, we should trust those who are qualified to deal with them. This mantra rose to a screeching decibel during the COVID-19 pandemic, when officials pleaded with the public to follow the medical authorities’ mandates. The insistence continues today, but its application has expanded to every area, from education to sexual ethics.

The claim, then, suggests that if we don’t agree with the consensus view, we are anti-science, anti-expert, and anti-intellectual.

Contained within this message is the accusation that a portion of our society—conservatives particularly and evangelicals especially—resist academic authority and hold back progress. The claim, then, suggests that if we don’t agree with the consensus view, we are anti-science, anti-expert, and anti-intellectual.

Indeed, many Christians have a troubled relationship with trusting expertise in our society. Understandably so, since the established authorities in science, medicine, academics, and government have taken a decidedly anti-biblical stance. For example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) currently advocates the use of chestfeeding as another word for nursing, in an effort to be inclusive to people attempting to change their gender.1

With such twisted thinking infiltrating science and medical fields, we may wonder if we can trust anything the experts say. But since open hostility toward Christ has become enmeshed with legitimate medical and scientific knowledge, we would be throwing some pretty big babies out with the bathwater by rejecting all scientific claims. We must learn instead how to navigate the winding corridors of claims put forth by experts in our culture.

Admitting We Have a Problem

Research has shown that conservatives and evangelicals display a great deal of distrust for all types of authority.2^,3^,4 Some distrust is good since we reject consensus views in favor of what Scripture says about a literal six-day creation, sanctity of life, and God’s design for sexuality and marriage. At the same time, our distrust has made us prone to believe things that are wrong.

My own observations as a pastor confirm this trend. On a weekly basis, I hear an alarming amount of outlandish and fear-fueled thoughts in conversations at church. Examples range from belief in a flat earth to a conspiracy theory involving graphene oxide, cell phones, and vaccines. The willingness to entertain utter absurdities, even among otherwise level-headed people, seems to have intensified in recent years.

Rejecting actual science because of what the opposing side says is just as bad as their labeling all dissent as anti-intellectual. We should prudently listen to all claims while maintaining a firm understanding of and commitment to genuine science along with its findings, methodologies, and institutions.

Seeing Clearly Through The Haze

God knows everything and has never been taught by anyone (Isaiah 40:12–14). However, contrary to what some people think of themselves, no human knows everything. God made all of us different, with varying gifts (Exodus 35:10, 25, 30–35). He has done this on purpose, in part, so that we must rely on each other (1 Corinthians 12:4–7). Expertise, therefore, is a gift from God.

Most of us would not be willing to live without experts. Parents sometimes thank me, as a science teacher, for doing something they admit they could not do. Those same parents probably wouldn’t pay me to clean their teeth, fix their cars, or play basketball.

No one has the time or talent to be an expert on everything. We have to trust someone. The problem is that all humans, even experts, are finite, fallible, and fallen. Sometimes when I bring my car back from the mechanic, it’s still making that noise. Hot stock tips turn out to be a disappointing bust. And some of us are begging to be told, once and for all, whether or not eggs are healthy to eat. Even in scientific research—the area that is supposed to be protected through objective, rational processes—bias exists and outright fraud happens more often than many realize.5

That’s why, as a science teacher, I would never tell my students to just trust the experts. I train them on the nature of science and insist that we must test all things (Acts 17:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:21; 1 John 4:1). After all, skepticism and critical thought are at the very heart of science and academic endeavor.

The good news is that we can trust the experts God has given us, if we’re willing to put in the work to exercise discernment. Practically, we should watch out for two things: bias and bad science.

1. Beware Bias

The ways in which our minds distort our perception of reality and hinder decision-making are called cognitive biases. Here are a few biases we should watch for when discerning which claims to believe.

• Framing Effect. If information is framed in a positive light, we are more likely to accept it. Which would you rather agree to: an offer presented as having a 90% success rate or one having a 10% failure rate? This bias is often leveraged in marketing and politics. For example, a pharmaceutical company can make a product appear safer by highlighting its potential benefits and minimizing its risks.

• Availability Heuristic. We are swayed by easily available information. If you recently saw a news report about an armed robbery in your area, you may be afraid to go outside at night, thinking armed robberies are more common than they are. And speaking of bias, when I said earlier that it seems like the trend of Christians believing nonsense has grown worse, it may just be that my thinking about this trend made me pay more attention to it. I would need a lot more evidence to determine if my perceptions were true.

• Dunning-Kruger Effect. People with little expertise in a particular area may overestimate their knowledge in that area. In other words, the less you know about a topic, the more you think you know about that topic. Purveyors of bogus scientific claims take advantage of this tendency by presenting enough scientific-sounding information to make us feel informed. We should be cautious when handling information on topics we know little about, especially when more information could change the entire picture. For example, many times evolutionists have had to eat crow after confidently claiming certain organs or genes are useless evolutionary leftovers, when more research showed they are essential. Such was the case with the HBBP1 so-called pseudogene, which turned out to be essential to red blood cell formation.6

• Confirmation Bias. We tend to pay attention to information that confirms the beliefs we already hold while ignoring information that disproves our beliefs. Seeing what we expect to see is common. Even scientists fall prey to subconsciously reading their own hypotheses into data. Too often, if experts tell us something that conflicts with our beliefs, we’ll find an expert who confirms our beliefs. Videos of so-called whistleblowers with medical or scientific credentials spread like wildfire on social media during the COVID-19 pandemic, spouting various explanations or conspiracy theories. The claims made in these videos couldn’t possibly all be true, but people were willing to share them, in part, because they reinforced an already held suspicion.

Flat-earth belief is an extreme example of bias. Many flat earthers are convinced they are choosing to believe the Bible over the experts, even taking Scripture out of context or misinterpreting verses to support their claims. In reality, these people are inserting an idea into the Bible that isn’t there.7 We must not allow our personal, extra-biblical beliefs to become entangled—or worse, synonymous—with Scripture.

God loves the truth and strongly condemns anything that rejects reality. We as God’s people should do the same.

It is important to recognize bias because our allegiance must be to truth rather than to our political or cultural positions. God loves the truth (Psalm 89:14; 3 John 1:4) and strongly condemns anything that rejects reality (Exodus 20:16; Revelation 21:8). We as God’s people should do the same. When asking which claims to trust, we need to identify the facts and then weigh the facts carefully, aware of our own biases so that we can remove whatever stands between us and the truth.

Worldview Bias

Nowhere is bias more evident than in the differences between our worldviews. Many Christians are used to detecting the difference between fact and interpretation of fact when it comes to evolutionary content. But worldview bias appears in many other areas too.

Let’s return to the phrase “trust the experts.” It’s easy to boast you’re on the side of the experts when you share the same worldview as the establishment. What they’re really saying is, “Believe our worldview!” The example regarding the CDC’s use of the word chestfeeding reveals that experts have worldviews regarding gender that influence their interpretation in their areas of expertise.

Still, just because an expert is telling us something against our worldview doesn’t mean they’re entirely against the truth. A mechanic who is an atheist lives in the same world we do when it comes to cars. Though he doesn’t believe in God, he acknowledges carburetors and crankshafts, so his atheism is unlikely to affect his job. A podiatrist will likely give the same diagnosis for your plantar fasciitis whether he believes in evolution or not. But on issues with political or philosophical considerations, more lies at stake for the expert, and therefore, more opportunity for him to be under the influence of bias. The more important the issues, the harder we must work to reach the truth.

Only the Bible supplies the foundation for a rational, predictable universe.

You might ask, “Isn’t commitment to the Bible a bias?” Without question! Everyone has lenses through which they view reality. The question is whether the lenses clarify or confuse reality. The Bible, God’s revelation to humanity, is the clearest lens. The pursuit of truth must begin with God’s Word. Only the Bible supplies the foundation for a rational, predictable universe. For example, we know what God has told us regarding origins. We are liberated then from claims of experts that tell us that living things came about by chance processes. With a biblical worldview, we have an advantage that will lead us to better scientific questions and discoveries.

2. Beware Bad Science

Another area in which we must exercise discernment is bad science. Because science is known as a powerful tool, the appearance of science is often used to mislead. Remember to look for these marks of deception in sources you both agree and disagree with.

• Emotional manipulation. Using emotions, especially fear, is a chief tactic employed by manipulators. If they can’t convince people using evidence, they’ll leave you asking what terrible thing might happen if you don’t believe them. This tactic abounds in discussions involving health, politics, gender, and climate change.

• Immunity to questioning. If questioning an idea is not allowed, especially where there are legitimate questions to ask, irrationality is likely involved. Evolution is a prime example. In established academic circles, it is considered unreasonable even to suggest that intelligence was involved in the origin of living things. In light of the marvelous complexity and sophistication of biological systems, the resistance to questions is a red flag.

• Refusal to produce evidence. Sometimes a person making a claim will say he cannot produce evidence because he has been forbidden to share information. But an explanation of why there isn’t evidence is not evidence. This frequently occurs in discussions about UFOs and other alleged cover ups.

• Anecdotes. Narratives can be more convincing than good arguments. In science, however, stories do not constitute evidence. The fact that someone can tell a convincing narrative that a certain event caused another, doesn’t mean it did. This is why scientific studies often involve many people over long time periods. Anecdotes are frequently used in conversations about health. For example, someone may tell a story about a dietary supplement that helped him lose weight, when the supplement had nothing to do with weight loss. Likewise, someone’s report that she became ill after taking a certain vaccine doesn’t mean the vaccine caused the illness.

• Cherry picking. A person may start with an idea he or she wants to prove and carefully select certain information to support the idea. This is connected to confirmation bias. Cherry picking shows up in conspiracy theories in which much information is ignored to construct a narrative regarding a nefarious plot.

• Vague academic references. To support an idea, a person may refer to a scientific paper without providing depth. If the source uses only the title instead of showing how the conclusions were drawn, the study is likely being misused. People are particularly susceptible to be swayed by these references if they are unfamiliar with the scientific field and if the presentation looks convincing.

• Singular studies. Sometimes presenters will dredge up the one study that agrees with them. If just one study or one researcher is behind a claim, it’s best not to base important decisions on it. The more eyes that are on a topic, generally, the safer it is. This does not mean that when a majority of experts say something, it must be true. The results are just less likely to be a deception or a fluke.

As an example of bad science, consider the claim circulating on social media that the COVID-19 vaccines contain graphene oxide. According to this claim, the FEMA emergency alert test on October 4, 2023, was supposed to somehow activate the graphene oxide in vaccinated people across the US, giving the government the ability to control people. Obviously, nothing of the sort happened. These claims used a combination of emotional manipulation, vague references, anecdotes, and cherry picking to construct a conspiracy theory. They offered no solid evidence, just unrelated facts, fear, and lies arranged to tell a story.

Trust But Verify

Trust the experts? Well, maybe test the experts to see if they’re trustworthy. Experts are a gift from God, and they would have no authority unless it had been given them from above. As Christians, we should freely make use of the contributions of experts while wisely being aware of deception—including self-deception. We must first base our thinking on God’s Word and then remove obstructions to clear thinking, such as bias and bad science, not only in the sources we oppose but also in the sources we want to agree with.

We can admire the hippies for their willingness to go against the establishment and to rethink traditions and conventions. However, unlike the hippies, our goal is not just to be countercultural and antiestablishment but to show the God of truth through the science of his creation (John 14:6). Just remember to wear a shirt the next time you walk into the store.