|
|
Post by mslo79 on Oct 1, 2019 6:31:59 GMT
ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ What's the odds of a image like that, which is clearly a lady there, forming from some totally unexplained phenomenon? ; don't you think it's more likely it's tied to what the Catholic church says it is (which is the mother of Jesus Christ) then some "random completely unexplainable event"? ; what's more likely to be true? ; this surely plays in my favor 
you said, "those with faith will basically conjure up any BS excuse to confirm God's existence even when faced with no evidence." ; but there is a plausible level of evidence. you just choose not to see it. faustus5 Figures, you go with personal attacks instead of saying what's flawed about what I said. what you just did to me is a typical reaction from someone when they got no real counter to what I said, they default to personal attacks in a attempt to 'win' the conversation. but in the end... it ends up making that person look bad, not me. you would have been better off not replying than saying what you just did about me. because if you were truly so intellectually above me etc, you would have seen this much and not said what you just said, especially with not even a attempt at saying why the image is not legitimate.
but putting aside the personal attacks for a moment... what's not legit about the image when it does things that cannot be explained by science? I rest my case.
|
|
|
|
Post by fatpaul on Oct 1, 2019 7:32:48 GMT
what's not legit about the image when it does things that cannot be explained by science? Just because something is inexplicable it doesn't necessarily imply divine intervention. This is special pleading. I can just as well give another form of special pleading and say that aliens, who like religious icons, did it. I rest my case.
|
|
|
|
Post by ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ on Oct 1, 2019 9:21:44 GMT
ᵗʰᵉᵃᵘˣᵖʰᵒᵘ What's the odds of a image like that, which is clearly a lady there, forming from some totally unexplained phenomenon? ; don't you think it's more likely it's tied to what the Catholic church says it is (which is the mother of Jesus Christ) then some "random completely unexplainable event"? ; what's more likely to be true? ; this surely plays in my favor  you said, "those with faith will basically conjure up any BS excuse to confirm God's existence even when faced with no evidence." ; but there is a plausible level of evidence. you just choose not to see it. Wait—are we arguing what’s more or less likely to be true or what actually is? Because you’ve not proved anything at all. No one has. So, therefore, the right conclusion is that it’s unexplained pending further analysis.
If odds and plausibility is all you’ve got then you clearly don’t understand the concept of evidence and how it works.
Anyway, I don’t know why you’re looking for proof to back up what you already believe. You’ve already conceded in another post that, for people with faith (like yourself), no evidence is required. It’s a more digestible way of admitting 'I don’t wish to think rationally lest it expose my feelgood beliefs as false.'
|
|
|
|
Post by faustus5 on Oct 1, 2019 10:27:24 GMT
. . .but putting aside the personal attacks for a moment... what's not legit about the image when it does things that cannot be explained by science? I rest my case. Images don't do anything that cannot be explained by science, including the image you are blabbing about.
I rest my case.
|
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Mar 14, 2020 9:22:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Mar 14, 2020 21:09:52 GMT
Have you not read this thread? It has been proven to be paint on hemp, of a traditional venerated woman Catholicised by the Spaniards to appease the local people.
|
|