Here is the problem I have with the idea of pareidolia: it is a fancy label and definition, but not a sufficient explanation. You may talk about we are programmed by evolution to recognize patterns, particularly those signalling danger, but that does not change the fact that wildfire smoke or flames occasionally arranges itself, by chance and thermal currents, into shapes resembling demon faces.
Citing pareidolia would have us stop there, admitting of no further meaning. However, the fact that we see demon faces in the smoke does have meaning -- likely not within the smoke, but within our minds and how we interpret things. We see a personification of the force of the flames, governed by malice rather than random chance. If you listen to real firefighters, this is often how they talk.
Worse, it contains an implicit bias against the supernatural. If demons exist and they choose to manifest themselves in that way, or if Jesus does decide to imprint His image on toast, pareidolians bound by their definition would be unable to distinguish it from a random scorch mark, and we are left with the usual divide between believers and unbelievers. The definition only has currency within the skeptical community. It is not capable of persuading believers at whom it is casually tossed, or anyone with a bit of imagination.