Oddly, in practice it's the other way around. The vast vast majority of the population, for example, is in no position to question the LHC result identifying t

Oddly, in practice it's the other way around. The vast vast majority of the population, for example, is in no position to question the LHC result identifying the Higgs boson. Unless you have a cool billion dollars or so to build your own collider, you are essentially in the position that an expert has told you so, and some other experts said they agree with them (peer review). So therefore believe what you are told. And whenever people do question scientific results, without the expensive equipment and basing their entire career around becoming employed as a scientist, we tend to call them cranks. With most religious positions (eg, what is the biblical view on X), you've probably got three copies of different translations lying around the house, and have every means and encouragement to do your own questioning, argument, and interpretation. In terms of the actual practice of questioning, interpreting evidence, and weighing up a decision on an open question where there are differing views -- most people have vastly more experience and engagement of doing that with religion than with science.