Deity Existence

[Hraesvelg]

There again is another thing. There is no real proof of god's existence except in stories and things and again you can't just say there COULD be a things in between cause there again is no proof so what you are trying to say, Jik, is that you are thinking ahead without smelling the coffee. You are saying what could happen but is no proof.

Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.

[Blaaaaaaaah]

Remember this is Mature Discussions and don't spam. And also try keep on topic. I know this thread went off topic once, but it was still carrying on a good discussion.

[Jikanu]

Yeah, he's gone back to saying "There's no proof against it, so it could be true, and I know of no other explanation, so it must be true."

Punctuation would really help you out a bit, mate. Unfortunately, Jik's responses shows that he hasn't really read and/or absorbed anything Vasu or I've said thus far. We're really spinning our wheels at this point.

*sigh* not true. im saying there that there IS proof towards a God, but there isnt any real conclusive evidence. there are minor things that suggest his existance, such as the aforementioned Our Lady of Guadalupe, and perhaps the healing of a sick one who seemed on the brink of death, but all of them could be simply dismissed as "Freak Accidents" by some, and therefore not be truely accepted. im saying that there's evidence in this life, just none that conclusively gives us a yes or no answer.

And as for rice writing, the images are extremely complex. here's a quote from wikipedia:


"Photographers and ophthalmologists have reported images reflected in the eyes of the Virgin.[40][41] In 1929 and 1951 photographers found a figure reflected in the Virgin's eyes; upon inspection they said that the reflection was tripled in what is called the Purkinje effect. This effect is commonly found in human eyes.[38] The ophthalmologist Dr. Jose Aste Tonsmann later enlarged the image of the Virgin's eyes by 2500x magnification and said he saw not only the aforementioned single figure, but rather images of all the witnesses present when the tilma was shown to the Bishop in 1531. Tonsmann also reported seeing a small family—mother, father, and a group of children—in the center of the Virgin's eyes.[38] In response to the eye miracles, Joe Nickell and John F. Fischer wrote in Skeptical Inquirer that images seen in the Virgin's eyes are the result of the human tendency to form familiar shapes from random patterns, much like a psychologist's inkblots—a phenomenon known as religious pareidolia.[42]
Richard Kuhn, who received the 1938 Nobel Chemistry prize, is said to have analyzed a sample of the fabric in 1936 and said the tint on the fabric was not from a known mineral, vegetable, or animal source.[38] In 1979 Philip Serna Callahan studied the icon with infrared light and stated that portions of the face, hands, robe, and mantle appeared to have been painted in one step, with no sketches or corrections and no apparent brush strokes.[43]"

And yes, i read the skeptic's claims, but if multiple people have seen it, it's slightly more probably a work of the eyes, not the imagination.

[Ivramire]

And yes, i read the skeptic's claims, but if multiple people have seen it, it's slightly more probably a work of the eyes, not the imagination.

Sounds very similar to ghost-hunter's claimed recordings of the whispering and murmurs of ghosts. They record sounds in ''haunted'' locations which people hear as unexplainable voices and mutterings.


Listeners however who are not told what they are supposed to hear, hear nothing at all. The individual is smart. The group is not.

[Jikanu]

But no one is grouping up and examining these eyes all at once. they all are allowed to observe it with a microscope, and see what they will.

[Ivramire]

That was the most inconsequential part of the whole post... xD

but if multiple people have seen it, it's slightly more probably a work of the eyes, not the imagination.

More in reply to this part of your post, what you see and what's really there aren't always the same thing.

[Jikanu]

Agreed, but if multiple sources agree with it, it's a bit more credible than some random hobo on a street corner screaming "I SEE IMAGES IN A LADY'S EYES DOOD."

and what about the fact that it was also made of an unidentifiable substance, as said by the nobel prize winning chemist?

[Ivramire]

Agreed, but if multiple sources agree with it, it's a bit more credible than some random hobo on a street corner screaming "I SEE IMAGES IN A LADY'S EYES DOOD."

I can get multiple hobos saying the same thing and they too would be multiple sources. Need much more than ''multiple'' people saying the same thing.

and what about the fact that it was also made of an unidentifiable substance, as said by the nobel prize winning chemist?

Richard Kuhn, who received the 1938 Nobel Chemistry prize, is said to have analyzed a sample of the fabric in 1936

.

[Jikanu]

So the fact that he won the prize a few years later makes him less intelligent?

and true. i digress that point.

[Vasu]

Okay, for the sake of argument, let us assume that these paintings were by a supernatural being. Now how does that correlate to every other assumption made in the Bible? Benevolence? Omnipotence? Omniscience? This is not "evidence".