Bloody Theresa

When i look at bloody Theresa i say that there is no possible way she is actually bleeding that much in those spots without wounds. Without proof i would never even come close to believing that it was actually happening. This isn't because i don't believe in god or miracles but because i do, but i also call Theresa a big liar. I don't see how anyone can look at this and blindly accept it, and i don't think many people do.
The question i am now asking myself is how would i go bout thinking this if I was before Descartes. If Descartes supposedly changed the way the world thinks today, does that mean that i would blindly accept that Theresa bleeds for no reason? I would like to think i would still think critically about stuff like that but who can be sure. I can't see myself accepting anything and everything as truth but the world was different before Descartes.
Bloody Theresa is just one example, I find it very hard to accept almost anything without first having a lot of proof. Is Descartes the one to thank for all my skepticism? It's also hard for me to believe that Descartes almost alone had that much impact to change the way humans think today.