Evidence of miracles.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 16, 2022

chad kincham said:
There are thousands upon thousands of testimony of Christians being healed after prayer, each one with multiple witnesses, but when I collected videos of some of them, I only saved the ones where the medical doctor involved in a miracle healing, called them a miracle - and the doctor involved would be the one in a position to know.

Sure, there are also thousands upon thousands of testimonies of Indian gurus performing levitation, miraculous healing, turning water into wine, etc; similarly, there are thousands upon thousands of testimonies of Philipino and Brazilian psychic surgeons doing bloodless surgery using only their fingers and with no anaesthetic.

It just shows how easily people will believe what they want to be true.

My favorite one so far is where a deceased ER patient, dead for 40 minutes, was resurrected by a medical doctor praying for the man - with the ER staff as witnesses

Presumably you do know that tens of thousands of people are revived after clinical death every year because 'clinical death' is not necessarily 'being dead'? It varies, but the most common definition is when the heart stops beating and the lungs stop breathing. However, in emergency room situations, low-level intermittent function may be missed, and, of course, other interventions such as CPR are often used.

If you want a classic example of a supposedly 'miraculous revival from the dead', consider Jean Hilliard, who was found frozen solid after being out overnight in sub-freezing temperatures. Snopes has the true story.

Mountainmike · Jan 17, 2022

Anecdotal evidence is clearly a problem for verification.
But consciousness is experience, and experience by definition is anecdotal.

It’s the reason it is an area not well researched as noted by the author of “ twin telepathy”

The incident I related of the dirty tie, is the specific incident that got greyson interested ( who defined the much used greyson test) in studying the subject who wrote the book “ after”. There is (my view) so much that is inexplicable :ie people experiencing what they cannot have witnessed , including those with inactive brain cortex, that out of body really does happen, but not in a controllable way. You cannot decide to do it, so it cannot be repeated on demand.

partinobodycular said:
I'm sorry if I missed the post where you referred to this case, so I haven't actually investigated it, not that that would make any difference. It would have to be extremely well documented for me to accept it as evidence. I'll readily admit that I absolutely hate, hate, hate anecdotal evidence, because it's far too prone to embellishment.

What generally happens in our everyday lives is that we'll experience something that seems out of the ordinary. It may just be a misperception or a coincidence, but none-the-less it stands out to us at the time as being unusual. So we remember it. Although perhaps not completely accurately. In most cases we simply forget about it. But sometimes we may mention this event to others, and in doing so we may embellish it a tiny little bit just to give the listener a better sense of how unusual it was. Because we want them to feel just as perplexed as we did. It's not intentional, or premeditated, or nefarious, we just want the other person to understand the unusual nature of the event. We want them to share in our astonishment.

Most of the time that's about as far as it goes. The other person will either share in our bewilderment, or they'll show a polite level of bemusement. Sometimes however we'll run into a skeptic who'll question our rationality. In which case we'll feel a strong urge to defend ourselves by doubling down on our assertions, and perhaps adding a few minor details just for emphasis. But it's those added details that are the problem, because sometimes they're born out of what we imagined happened, or information that we've attained after the fact. Put those things together and a very elaborate and convincing tale can begin to emerge, but one which wanders further and further from the original event.

Unfortunately we'll then resolutely believe that our elaborated story is the God's honest truth, and our defense of it will become more and more unwavering.

So in cases like the one you mentioned above I'm not going to buy into it unless you can give me documented evidence of the very original story, and after the fact eyewitness testimony doesn't count, it's just too prone to getting embellished.

Now if you've got a case that'll pass my smell test then bring it on, otherwise I'm simply going to dismiss it as being unreliable, for the simple reason that anecdotal evidence is just too hard to verify.

Mountainmike · Jan 17, 2022

Until you are willing to study the process ,which is very thorough you cannot judge those involved.

I’m replying to this only to note the extreme double standards of a priori “belief based” sceptics. You need degree of introspection here.

Because if I were to quote a phenomenon:

And - if all I had on my side , was the writings of an illusionist( or priest) not involved in the process of evaluating it, with hearsay about the views of one or two others.

And if you had 300 medics in your corner who did research it , supporting your view , you would ridicule me, and rightly so!

It is called confirmation bias on your part, and it is too often the knee jerk reaction of sceptics.

In this case the overwhelming view of science is that it agrees with me!

Read up on case 69, or 70 of you wish. Books are written about 70 You cannot deny them all!!

NxNW said:
You'd think they would have documented it properly and without contradictions.

Unexplained is different from inexplicable. Randi pointed out contradictions in the records and proposed a plausible explanation.

Ah, so now you're accusing the doctors he quoted as being liars? Or not existing?

You're all over the place.

AV1611VET · Jan 17, 2022

Mountainmike said:
In this case the overwhelming view of science is that it agrees with me!

Are you bragging? or complaining?

That's not something I would be advertising, myself.

For example, take the parting of the Red Sea.

If God parted the Red Sea today, like He did in Pharaoh's time, and left it parted, so that scientists could analyze it with their myopic tools, wouldn't scientists eventually give up and claim they're at a loss to explain how God is doing it?

What if God lifted a feather up off of a table one foot, then left it suspended in air until scientists died of old age trying to figure out how He's doing it?

Do you really think scientists would conclude they're witnessing a "miracle"?

I don't think their pride would let them.

They'd probably claim they discovered some new force in the universe, give it a Latin name so the common people won't understand it, then go collect their Nobel prize.

Mountainmike · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
Do you really think scientists would conclude they're witnessing a "miracle"?

I don't think their pride would let them..

I agree In general , but there are a few who are willing to accept the miraculous. They get ridiculed for it.

AV1611VET said:
They'd probably claim they discovered some new force in the universe, give it a Latin name so the common people won't understand it, then go collect their Nobel prize.

But that of course IS science. It doesn’t “ explain” it observes and codifies patterns in observation, which is limited to what our senses observe!

Even hawking gave up on the idea that a unique model can account for it all.

Of course science is also very useful. We have harnessed “what normally happens”in both very constructive and very destructive ways.

But The fact that something normally does what it normally does, is no proof at all that it cannot do something else, or be made to do something else by a presence we cannot detect.

Science is a hammer. A tool.
It’s amazing how many in our world now seem to worship the hammer, as if the hammer were the fundamental truth! they got a cart in front of the horse somewhere didn’t they?!

The current philosophy of scientific realism, When confronting the supernatural is
“ that’s allright in practice, but it doesn’t work in theory , so it cannot be true….”

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
What if God lifted a feather up off of a table one foot, then left it suspended in air until scientists died of old age trying to figure out how He's doing it?

Do you really think scientists would conclude they're witnessing a "miracle"?

... They'd probably claim they discovered some new force in the universe...

They'd be right - God would have to apply a force to achieve that result, even if the end result was achieved with, say, electrostatic charge.

AV1611VET · Jan 17, 2022

Mountainmike said:
But that of course IS science. It doesn’t “explain” it observes and codifies patterns in observation, which is limited to what our senses observe!

But science takes it a step too far when they call it "magic."

When science refers to the parting of the Red Sea as "magic" or "myth," then science has overstepped its bounds.

Science should just admit that they're myopic about it and let it go.

But no, they can't let it go at that.

They HAVE to label it something, just so they can say they investigated it.

So ... what label do you think they'll prefer? magic, myth, or miracle?

Science will even go so far as to act like they were there when it happened, and claim Pharaoh wasn't who the Bible says he was, there were no Jews in Egypt, and a host of other Bible-denying lies.

Look how fast science labeled Hesperopithecus haroldcookii?

Then blamed it on yellow journalism when they got busted?

While the so-called scientific method says you should ask questions first before you make a decision, in practice, they do just the opposite about 25% of the time.

Unless it's in the Bible, then that percentage goes up to 100.

EVERY MONTH Scientific American and Popular Science comes out with a new discovery, a new invention, a new SOMETHING.

It gives the common people the impression that they're busy doing something.

When the L'Aquila earthquake hit, where were the seismologists?

Probably in Hawaii enjoying the sunshine.

Then they all rush to L'Aquila and act busy -- even telling the common people it was safe to return to their homes.

And the common people believed them, and paid for it with their lives.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
But science takes it a step too far when they call it "magic."

Citation?

When science refers to the parting of the Red Sea as "magic" or "myth," then science has overstepped its bounds.

Science should just admit that they're myopic about it and let it go.

But no, they can't let it go at that.

They HAVE to label it something, just so they can say they investigated it.

They have investigated it - there have been numerous hypotheses of varying likelihood to explain how such a phenomenon could occur naturally. But given the lack of geological evidence in favour, the lack of detail in the description, and the lack of other corroborating accounts, it's generally thought that it's currently undecidable.

Given the conveniently coincidental nature of the occurrence in the story, the hypothesis that it's fictional has relatively high credibility. But it's possible that an event like the one described had occurred at some earlier time and was used in the story as a plot device.

AV1611VET · Jan 17, 2022

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
They have investigated it - there have been numerous hypotheses of varying likelihood to explain how such a phenomenon could occur naturally. But given the lack of geological evidence in favour, the lack of detail in the description, and the lack of other corroborating accounts, it's generally thought that it's currently undecidable.

Given the conveniently coincidental nature of the occurrence in the story, the hypothesis that it's fictional has relatively high credibility. But it's possible that an event like the one described had occurred at some earlier time and was used in the story as a plot device.

Thanks for the QED.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
Thanks for the QED.

What, no citation for your claim?

Some parades are just asking to be rained on.

AV1611VET · Jan 17, 2022

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
What, no citation for your claim?

Some parades are just asking to be rained on.

I'm not going to do your work for you, Frumious.

Run a FIND on the word "magic" here and see for yourself.

partinobodycular · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
I'm not going to do your work for you, Frumious.

Not that old song again. You would think that after being called out for something innumerable times, that a rational person would stop doing it...but nope.

AV1611VET said:
Run a FIND on the word "magic" here and see for yourself.

Thanks for making me waste my time. That search was pointless.

If someone asks you a legitimate question, just give them an honest answer, even if that answer reflects poorly on your position. Then if they don't agree with your answer they'll at least know that you've made an honest and sincere attempt to present it, and that really is all that they could've asked for.

Aren't patience and honesty supposed to be a Christian thing?

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jan 17, 2022

AV1611VET said:
I'm not going to do your work for you, Frumious.

Run a FIND on the word "magic" here and see for yourself.

Meh. Your claim, your burden of proof.

Hans Blaster · Jan 17, 2022

Mountainmike said:
I won’t waste time most of your Post :

Slowly you begin to understand our position.

Mountainmike said:
suffice to say, the scientific model is a man made observation model of what repeats, and logical consequences of that. Read Kant. It is not the universe itself. It does not “ explain” anything, it simply determines whether observations are normal behaviour. It cannot exclude phenomena which do not conform.

Kant is a long dead philosopher. I just don't care what he thinks. (or more importantly -- what you think he thought.)

Mountainmike said:
I will just to correct an error in my post for readers :

I meant The Rotation and shape of galaxies ( not universe) does not conform to gravitation models without supposition of missing matter ( aka modelling error)

It has been known for 100 years that Universe /= Galaxy. Please do keep up.

As for dark matter, that you don't understand how we can know about dark matter and how it is scientific to consider it's existence and properties, just might be why fail to understand why we don't find any of your case studies convincing.

Hans Blaster · Jan 17, 2022

Mountainmike said:
Science is a hammer. A tool.

It’s amazing how many in our world now seem to worship the hammer, as if the hammer were the fundamental truth! they got a cart in front of the horse somewhere didn’t they?!

You mistake "knowing how to use the tool" for worship. I find worship to be a pointless and demeaning activity, unworthy of a sentient being. I am a carpenter, not a supplicant.

Mountainmike · Jan 18, 2022

I agree with your comments on the unverifiable nature of the red sea miracle. It leaves it as a matter of belief

Its why I focus on more recent events, particularly those that leave an evidence trail.

One of the most fascinating things to me about Fatima is the many witnesses who described the torrential rain all morning (and it does rain in near biblical proportions here! I presently speak from portugal) .

Yet these many witnesses said their clothing and they dried in minutes - all natural fibre , so water retaining then, as the sun appeared to approach the earth. Professors. Sceptics. Police. Journalists. Why would they make it up?

Even the best of the heat pump , vaccuum or heat dryers takes an hour on clothes, the ground here does not dry for weeks.

I also find anecdotal evidence compelling where it can be verified that a person knew something way beyond random chance they cannot have experienced, discovered or predicted.

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Citation?

They have investigated it - there have been numerous hypotheses of varying likelihood to explain how such a phenomenon could occur naturally. But given the lack of geological evidence in favour, the lack of detail in the description, and the lack of other corroborating accounts, it's generally thought that it's currently undecidable.

Given the conveniently coincidental nature of the occurrence in the story, the hypothesis that it's fictional has relatively high credibility. But it's possible that an event like the one described had occurred at some earlier time and was used in the story as a plot device.

Mountainmike · Jan 18, 2022

Meanwhile in mainstream science galaxy rotation and shape was one of the factors that showed the mass imbalance, that led to the postulation of a fudge factor called dark matter. I guess being one time director over a big astrophysics company helps me know that.

I suggest you try to understand our position - that is the position of astrophysics.

As for Kant. The big problem is "know what it is you think you know" and what you can say for certain.
It is something they dont teach in high school science which is also why so many are so screwed up , those who think the science model IS the universe!

Trouble is , such as Kant is hard to understand, so I get why the less informed dont "get" it. You study phenomena, not noumena. You cannot know the reality behind the phenomena. Even hawking got there in the end with "model dependent reality" but didnt realise he had, it should be said.

My suggestion is, if you want to study this, is it is brought into sharp focus in quantum physics. Read quantum reality by Baggott for something fairly readable if you want a place to start.

Or the "science before science" by Rizzi. He is a Quantum physics professor And Christian. The two are not mutually exclusive.

I will ignore the insults.
But using your reasoning on long dead, I guess copernicus and maxwell are "no longer relevant" because they are long dead!

Hans Blaster said:
Slowly you begin to understand our position.

Kant is a long dead philosopher. I just don't care what he thinks. (or more importantly -- what you think he thought.)

It has been known for 100 years that Universe /= Galaxy. Please do keep up.

As for dark matter, that you don't understand how we can know about dark matter and how it is scientific to consider it's existence and properties, just might be why fail to understand why we don't find any of your case studies convincing.

Clizby WampusCat · Jan 18, 2022

Mountainmike said:
It is something they dont teach in high school science which is why too many are so screwed up , and think the science model IS the universe!

You keep saying this but I don't know of anyone that thinks that scientific models ARE the universe. They think they accurately describe the universe but no one thinks they ARE the universe. So what do you really mean by this?

AV1611VET · Jan 18, 2022

Mountainmike said:
Meanwhile in mainstream science galaxy rotation and shape was one of the factors that showed the mass imbalance, that led to the postulation of a fudge factor called dark matter.

What's interesting to me is that the discovery of dark energy and dark matter clears up a somewhat difficult passage of Scripture I used to wonder about.

2 Peter 2:4 For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;

Hans Blaster · Jan 18, 2022

Mountainmike said:
Meanwhile in mainstream science galaxy rotation and shape was one of the factors that showed the mass imbalance, that led to the postulation of a fudge factor called dark matter.

I know how we know about dark matter, but I also know it isn't a "fudge factor" or evidence that something is wrong with scientific methodology. Dark matter is a substance detected by inference from astronomical observations, rather than through direct interaction with terrestrial detection equipment. It is not a way to wedge favorite violations of the physical laws of the universe into credibility.

Mountainmike said:
I guess being one time director over a big astrophysics company helps me know that.

"a big astrophysics company"? What does that mean? (I can't conceive of any commercial enterprise that would make the manager well versed in dark matter.)

(Unless we're talking about about the companies that mine and and distribute dark matter for star ship fuel, but that's from a cartoon set 1000 years in the future, so not real.)

Mountainmike said:
I suggest you try to understand our position - that is the position of astrophysics.

I understand the position of "astrophysics" quite well, thank you. I need not a manager to explain it to me. Dark matter is irrelevant to the "miracle" discussion.

I Kant take the rest of this.

Evidence of miracles.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Rocket surgeon

Rocket surgeon

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

Rocket surgeon

Similar threads