False witnesses among us

Ed Darrell at MFB has an interesting post on a church deacon who claims that DDT was never a problem. Ed whacks Bob Mattes for his false witness on the effects of DDT on the ecology. 

This led me to thinking about the Old Testament charlatans and false witnesses who proclaimed false truths. (I know, kind of strange,  my mind wanders that way but truths are truths regardless of the age.)

If you don’t know the truth, you may be bamboozled by false witnesses.

We live in the age of magic brought to us by science. Crystal balls? Television sets. Magic Wands? Remote controls. Magic Potions? Drugs and Medications.
All of the things (almost) that  man has imagined can now be accomplished by science, or else we can see that science will ultimately make it so.
Yet, all this science has become so complex that it  requires an understanding that the average person may no longer possess. When this happens, there is room for false witnesses to promote mystical, magical, or religious reasons for the events observed and to scoff at, or be derisive of, or to challenge  scientists to prove their cases repeatedly to the uninformed average person. Manipulating the ignorant for ideological reasons is a time-worn practice practiced by charlatans and false witnesses.
Reading was once the solution to combat the uninformed and education was once a solution  for an illiterate population, however, one cannot read enough anymore to know the science behind all events. This opens the doors to charlatans to ply their trade among us. It should be no surprise that religious persons may be among the first false witnesses to postulate false root causes of events that surround us. It should also be no surprise that party politicians may  be the second. A deadly combination is a  religious person with political intent who expounds false information by intent or by ignorance.

Prior to mass communication, lies could be told and re-told to great effect to unknowing and unlearned populations. When mass communication first occurred, it became possible to spread the truth and expose false witnesses for what they really were. I think the spread of truth and knowledge was seen as a hope for mankind, as a beacon on a  hill, if you will. 

Today though, mass communication is sometimes used to spread false ideas and to manipulate a sometimes ill-informed and possibly  uneducated public. It is  not always clear exactly how successful this is but  many people do  succumb to the spread of false information because they have no other source of information. We call this propaganda when it is done by governments. We call this “spin” when it is done by political parties. And we call this false advertising when it is done by companies.

What do we call it when a person chooses to only hear the words and listen to the arguments of one person or one  organization or one  company or one government? Narrow mindedness, perhaps? 

False witnesses may be spreading false information because they have secret agendas. Other false witnesses may spread false information because they know no better.  

Which brings me to this question: How do you recognize false witnesses  and what do you do about them when you find them?

Ed Darrell exposes their false truths and issues them challenges. What do you do?

Often I ignore them because I instinctively know they are wrong and I am unable to describe or document it.  Should I make an attempt?

Is there room for truth in the world and do people wish to hear it?