I have been following the debates this semester while teaching a course in
research methods at the graduate level.  Chris Stuart's comments reminded
me of a phenomenon in cognitive psychology.  Cognitive psychologists study
tendencies in human thinking and problem solving.  One of these
well-documented tendencies, that affects all of us in our search for and
acceptance of evidence, is known as the confirmation bias.

In my research methods class, I demonstrate with this simple problem.  I
provide the series of numbers, 2,4,6, and ask students to generate other
series in an attempt to determine the "rule" that I have used.  I will only
say yes or no to each series they generate -- either their series does or
does not follow my rule.  Most students will first give me series such as
"8,10,12", or other even-numbered, ascending series.  Then they suggest the
rule is even numbered, ascending order.  That's not it.  After a while,
someone will give me a series such as "1,3,5".  When I say "yes" to that,
they continue generating similar series.  Rarely, a student will give me a
series such as "1,2,3".  The answer is still yes.  Rarer still, a student
will say "1,5,10" and I still say yes.  But the rarest type of series
generated is along the lines of "5,4,3".  If a student gives me that kind
of series, I say no.  Then they finally figure out my rule -- any three
numbers in ascending order.

The reason it typically takes so long for them to determine my rule is that
they are searching only for confirming evidence -- generating series they
think consistent with the rule.  The quickest way to determine my rule
would be to search for disconfirming evidence instead.

I know, these are students, who do not have strong training in the
scientific method and critical thinking skills. However, in a classic
study, this exact problem was presented to scientists, and they did exactly
the same thing.  Whether we are nonscientists, social scientists, or
physical scientists, this is our natural tendency, and in scientific work
we must attempt to design our research to guard against it.

I am not accusing any specific person or group of bias -- simply agreeing
with Chris that we ALL have it.  In questions of faith, it is not something
to worry about -- it might be the ideal.  But in questions of science, when
you want the "truth", you have to try to overcome this and many other
errors in thinking.

Just my two bits.

Amye Warren