Which Religion is the Right Religion?

Joeseph

Hitcounter

@Joeseph Ask a scientist if the universe is flat see what they say

polytheistwitch

Another completely dumb post. I can't believe some of the words this site blocks.

Joeseph

@Hitcounter ;


Ask a scientist if the universe is flat see what they say

But that's not what you said, why are you lying?



You actually said .....the earth is most certainly flat

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: The Earth Is A Sphere

The Earth is not flat. There is overwhelming scientific evidence that the Earth is a spherical planet, not a flat disc. Here are the key points supporting this conclusion:

## Historical Evidence

Ancient Greek philosophers and astronomers, as early as the 6th century BCE, suggested the Earth was round. By the time of Aristotle, many Greeks understood Earth could only be a sphere based on observations like the circular shadow cast on the moon during lunar eclipses.

## Scientific Observations

1. Gravity pulls objects towards the center of the Earth from all points on its surface, which only makes sense for a spherical planet.

2. The curvature of the Earth's surface is visible to the naked eye, as sailors noticed ships' sails appearing before their hulls when approaching.

3. Different constellations are visible from the Northern and Southern hemispheres, which wouldn't be possible on a flat Earth.

## Modern Evidence

1. Thousands of images and videos from space, including live streams from the International Space Station, clearly show Earth as a sphere.

2. Global navigation systems like GPS rely on satellites orbiting a spherical Earth to function accurately.

3. The existence of time zones is a result of the Earth's rotation as a sphere.

## Scientific Consensus

The shape of the Earth is not a matter of debate in the scientific community. The idea that the Earth is flat requires denying multiple branches of science and inventing new laws of physics without evidence. While some conspiracy theories persist, they are not based on any credible scientific observations or experiments.

In conclusion, the Earth's spherical shape is a well-established scientific fact, supported by centuries of evidence from various fields of study and direct observation.

Citations:

[1] https://papersowl.com/examples/the-scientific-consensus-the-round-earth-explained/

[2] https://www.astronomy.com/astronomy-for-beginners/why-earth-is-not-flat-the-conspiracy-debunked/

[3] https://starchild.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/StarChild/questions/question35.html

[4] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/12/07/fact-check-roundup-what-scientists-say-flat-earth-evidence/10802218002/

[5] https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/earth-round.html

[6] https://www.astronomy.com/science/what-shape-is-the-universe/

Hitcounter

@polytheistwitch your making as much sense as I am

Hitcounter

@Joeseph well it stands to reason that if the universe itself is flat then why wouldn't the planet contained within be subject to the same flattening? how you know its not flat? cause Nasa said so?

polytheistwitch

@Hitcounter Don't compare your idiotic flat Earth crap, science is a religion to the site blocking words that have to go back and refigure.

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Moon Landings

Astronauts placed mirrors on the Moon during the Apollo missions. Specifically, the Apollo 11, 14, and 15 missions included the deployment of retroreflectors, which are arrays of corner-cube reflectors designed to reflect laser beams sent from Earth. 

These retroreflectors serve a crucial scientific purpose: they allow for precise measurements of the distance between the Earth and the Moon through a technique known as lunar laser ranging. By measuring the time it takes for a laser beam to travel to the Moon and back, scientists can calculate the distance with high accuracy. This experiment has provided valuable data for understanding various aspects of lunar motion and geophysics.

The retroreflectors left on the Moon continue to be used today by various observatories and research institutions around the world, demonstrating their long-term utility in space science[1].

Hitcounter

@JulesKorngold all this stuff you have said is meaningless to me I am a layman I require science be broken down in to layman's terms, if this is not possible then I am left unable to comprehend the truth which in itself renders the truth worthless.

You ever wonder why Prof. Brian Cox is so popular? he literally breaks it down in to the slowest most easy to understand language.

As you know Jules the entire of science has been proven wrong by other scientists over and over again, at one time the worlds leading scientists all though the earth was flat and got very nervous when people started saying sphere Neil Degrass (Nasa Spokesman) says its pear shaped yet none of Nasa’s official photos or footage confirm this pear shape so who’s to be believed Nasa or Nasa?  

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Science Is Not A Religion

## Differences Between Science and Religion

1. **Methodology and Basis**: Science is based on empirical evidence, observation, and reasoning. It relies on the scientific method, which involves forming hypotheses, conducting experiments, and drawing conclusions based on observable data[1]. Religion, on the other hand, often involves faith, belief in the supernatural, and spiritual experiences that are not subject to empirical testing[1][4].

2. **Purpose and Focus**: Science seeks to understand the natural world through testable explanations and predictions. It focuses on processes such as how planets move or the origin of life[1]. Religion typically addresses questions of meaning, purpose, and moral values, often concerning the relationship between humans and a higher power[1].

3. **Perceptions of Conflict**: While some perceive science and religion as inherently contradictory, others see them as compatible or addressing different aspects of human experience[2][3]. For instance, many people believe that science explains the "how" of natural phenomena, while religion addresses the "why" of existence[3].

## Common Ground

1. **Truth-Seeking**: Both science and religion can be seen as ways to seek truth and understand the world[4]. Some religious individuals find harmony between their faith and scientific understanding, seeing no conflict between the two[3][4].

2. **Historical Coexistence**: Throughout history, there have been periods of both conflict and collaboration between science and religion. Many early scientists were also religious figures who saw their scientific work as a way to understand divine creation[4][5].

## Conclusion

While science and religion can sometimes appear to be at odds due to their differing methodologies and areas of focus, they are fundamentally distinct in their approaches to understanding the world. Science is not considered a religion because it does not rely on faith or spiritual beliefs but rather on empirical evidence and logical reasoning. However, individuals may experience personal reconciliation between their scientific understanding and religious beliefs, finding ways for both to coexist in their worldview.

Citations:

[1] https://www.ineos.com/inch-magazine/articles/issue-7/debate/

[2] https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2015/10/22/perception-of-conflict-between-science-and-religion/

[3] https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/08/26/on-the-intersection-of-science-and-religion/

[4] https://www.eauk.org/idea/the-science-vs-faith-debate.cfm

[5] https://interfaith.wisc.edu/2023/05/01/science-vs-religion-a-debate-thats-not-worth-it-jaden-schultz/

[6] https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/kopjam/the_science_vs_religion_debate_should_be/

[7] https://www.astronomy.com/astronomy-for-beginners/why-earth-is-not-flat-the-conspiracy-debunked/

[8] https://www.astronomy.com/science/what-shape-is-the-universe/

polytheistwitch

@Hitcounter So you start a topic and then state that you can't understand discussing the topic.

Joeseph

@Hitcounter

well it stands to reason that if the universe itself is flat then why wouldn't the planet contained within be subject to the same flattening?

No it doesnt "stand to reason " its not up to me to educate you that was on the system that obviously failed you.


how you know its not flat?

Because I received a decent education.


 cause Nasa said so?

I've never had direct communication with NASA.

 

Barnardot

@Hitcounter ;for the purpose of the debate I rightfully hold science as a religious belief  given......

For the purpose of this debate, you should rightfully go get lost since you are an extreme dic*head and you have totally no idea of what you are talking about. Your best bet is to get the right therapy for your condition and stop being so stu-pid.

Factfinder

@Hitcounter

You don't really believe your nonsense. You're just tying to fill ricky's shoes? Book a flight with a window seat. When you're in the air look at the curvature of the earth yourself. 

Hitcounter

@polytheistwitch so you can understand science and religion then? you one of one cause top scientists like Willett, Kessler and Stampfer in spite of being the top of their fields don't claim to have any form of comprehensive understanding of the subject matter ...thus their research in their fields.

so as to your understanding of the matter at hand, you claim I don't understand ok so what do you understand about it?

Hitcounter

@Factfinder, so you think flight is real? .. have you ever heard of NASA's Ingenuity Mars Helicopter?, this is proof flight is not real

Hitcounter

@Joeseph education? you mean indoctrination surly? education is not designed to educate its designed to provide workers, non free thinkers that comply, you know this, you know this is why a gender studies degree exists, not only does it exist it supply's generals for the US army.

How can you stand on western education when it also produces some of the freakiest freaks on planet earth. the majority of the worlds wealthy people are entrepreneurs there is no entrepreneur degree cause the method of thinking cannot be taught it can only be experienced and draws its knowledge base from that experience.

A western education is only useful so long as the state is in need of a narrative, the current narrative is Trans thus Trans and freak Degrees are much more prominent, look a Jaguar, a person with a Degree in DEI influenced marketing made those decisions and you want me to trust that you know what you are talking about cause a peace of paper says you where a good boy for 4 years? 

Prove you've got a brain?    

just_sayin

@JulesKorngold
Jules, I got to disagree with your AI. Science is not as pristine and objective as your AI pretends.  Sometimes scientists make faith claims that they masquerade as science.  Let me give you an example.

John Hume advanced a famous argument against miracles.  It goes like this:
1) A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature
2) Firm and unalterable experience has established these laws.
3) A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.
4) Therefore, a uniform experience amounts to a proof; there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact against the existence of any miracles.

The problem is Hume is begging the question when he defines miracles as impossible.  He presumes to know all exerience is uniformly against miracles BEFORE he looks at the evidence.  How can he know that all possible past and future experience will support his naturalism?  The problem with Hume's maxim 'a wise man always proportions his belief to the evidence' is that Hume assumes  any rare event can never have as much evidence or validity as common events.  Hume isn't really 'weighing' the evidence, he just adds up the evidence and even if evidence exists for something, he automatically dismisses it if it is not the norm.  So, if there is evidence that a guy arose from the dead, Hume would argue that since the overwhelming evidence is people don't come back from the dead, we must assume that no one does.  But that would be like saying that since most people don't win the lottery that no one does.  Or that since the odds of being dealt a perfect bridge hand (which has happened) are unlikely, then it will never ever happen (the odds are 1,635,013,559,600 to 1).  But the problem is, the evidence says people do win the lottery and have gotten a perfect bridge hand.  General experience is just general experience, but it can not speak for all the evidence and can not dismiss out of hand evidence that doesn't fit the norm.

By begging the question as Hume does with miracles, he hinders the search for truth rather than helping it because he LEGISLATES the outcomes and meanings that can be found rather than LOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE.  A wise man does not proportion their belief to mere probabilities, but to the facts. And science should be a search for facts, not confirming one's bias - which unfortunately some so called science is about.

Another example is the fight between Bill Maher and Neil Degrasse Tyson recently.  Tyson refused to acknowledge the biological differences between male and female athletes.  Maher pushed Tyson on his science denial.  Tyson seemed to side with the notion that the only reason that teams in the WNBA could not beat a men's NBA team was because of social biases.  Biological men are taller, faster, stronger, have greater lung capacity, and larger hearts - Tyson denied the science for his political views.  Worse yet, the journal Scientific American has also abandoned science on this issue to suggest that there are no biological differences in men and women.  When 'science' can't admit that men and women are different, then science has indeed become as system of 'beliefs'.

Factfinder

just_sayin said:

@JulesKorngold
Jules, I got to disagree with your AI. Science is not as pristine and objective as your AI pretends.  Sometimes scientists make faith claims that they masquerade as science.  Let me give you an example.

John Hume advanced a famous argument against miracles.  It goes like this:
1) A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature
2) Firm and unalterable experience has established these laws.
3) A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence.
4) Therefore, a uniform experience amounts to a proof; there is here a direct and full proof, from the nature of the fact against the existence of any miracles.

The problem is Hume is begging the question when he defines miracles as impossible.  He presumes to know all exerience is uniformly against miracles BEFORE he looks at the evidence.  How can he know that all possible past and future experience will support his naturalism?  The problem with Hume's maxim 'a wise man always proportions his belief to the evidence' is that Hume assumes  any rare event can never have as much evidence or validity as common events.  Hume isn't really 'weighing' the evidence, he just adds up the evidence and even if evidence exists for something, he automatically dismisses it if it is not the norm.  So, if there is evidence that a guy arose from the dead, Hume would argue that since the overwhelming evidence is people don't come back from the dead, we must assume that no one does.  But that would be like saying that since most people don't win the lottery that no one does.  Or that since the odds of being dealt a perfect bridge hand (which has happened) are unlikely, then it will never ever happen (the odds are 1,635,013,559,600 to 1).  But the problem is, the evidence says people do win the lottery and have gotten a perfect bridge hand.  General experience is just general experience, but it can not speak for all the evidence and can not dismiss out of hand evidence that doesn't fit the norm.

By begging the question as Hume does with miracles, he hinders the search for truth rather than helping it because he LEGISLATES the outcomes and meanings that can be found rather than LOOKING AT THE EVIDENCE.  A wise man does not proportion their belief to mere probabilities, but to the facts. And science should be a search for facts, not confirming one's bias - which unfortunately some so called science is about.

Another example is the fight between Bill Maher and Neil Degrasse Tyson recently.  Tyson refused to acknowledge the biological differences between male and female athletes.  Maher pushed Tyson on his science denial.  Tyson seemed to side with the notion that the only reason that teams in the WNBA could not beat a men's NBA team was because of social biases.  Biological men are taller, faster, stronger, have greater lung capacity, and larger hearts - Tyson denied the science for his political views.  Worse yet, the journal Scientific American has also abandoned science on this issue to suggest that there are no biological differences in men and women.  When 'science' can't admit that men and women are different, then science has indeed become as system of 'beliefs'.

Your point being religion is more "pristine and objective"? Science corrects itself as it did with both your examples. Hume was debunked based on his presumptuous methodology, not cause any supernatural evidence popped up. Scientific American isn't a perfect institution and as Tyson noted the editor that let that in the edition of the magazine no longer works for it. Tyson believes we as a social species can look at gender as if it's a spectrum. I disagree with him on that for reasons you listed. Even though Neil Tyson is a scientist his word isn't going to be infallible. I'd probably trust what he says more when he's talking cosmology than biology as the former is more his expertise. When he does talk biology he does however concede to people having assigned genders at birth because, duh, no matter how sociably acceptable gender identifying spectrums one constructs; the physical reality still boils down to two genders with an occasional rare anomaly where a person is born with both sets of reproductive organs. He is a fan of the spectrum because as he has pointed out in the past; xy Chromosomes don't tell the whole story because as male or female we all have a percentage of both male and female chromosomes in us. That's probably how he reconciles the physical fact with what appears to be liberal views on the issue. Point being science doesn't make claims of infallibility, that's found in religion. He probably should have said that article didn't belong. Fact is you'll find a lot more pseudo science in creationism than you will in the rest of the scientific community combined. Cause it looks for the objective answers and falsifies its conclusions where as religious bias science is looking to affirm beliefs. You have no standing where objectivity is concerned.

Brunchfastfordinner

@Joeseph
Your joking right?

Joeseph

@Factfinder

Just Lying is totally misrepresenting Humes argument , he tried this several times and I corrected him several
 times.

Just Lying mentions the improbability of lottery wins as an analogy , it's a false one as we know lotteries are won  even if the the odds were in the trillions , also highly improbable bridge hands are played and will be played without appealing to magic.

 Hume did not argue against the existence of miracles but only against the credibility of someone who claimed to have witnessed a miracle. That is not the same thing. Of course Hume disbelieved in the existence of miracles, but remember, his argument was made in the context of his work An Enquiry Into Human Understanding.

It's pretty obvious really we have never seen a resurrected man or a man walking on water , and we have had 2,000 years of not seeing such, we are on  pretty safe ground to assume that the claims are dubious to say the least.

Joeseph

@Brunchfastfordinner

About what, you troll?

Brunchfastfordinner

@Joeseph The earth is not flat...

Joeseph

@Hitcounter

education? you mean indoctrination surly?

I didn't know math , philosophy , art were indoctrination...,do tell?


 education is not designed to educate its designed to provide workers, non free thinkers that comply, you know this

Why who designed it?



 you know this is why a gender studies degree exists, not only does it exist it supply's generals for the US army.

How many generals does it supply yearly?

How can you stand on western education when it also produces some of the freakiest freaks on planet earth. the majority of the worlds wealthy people are entrepreneurs there is no entrepreneur degree cause the method of thinking cannot be taught it can only be experienced and draws its knowledge base from that experience.

Well you really were neglected by the educational system so I understand your fury.

A western education is only useful so long as the state is in need of a narrative, the current narrative is Trans thus Trans and freak Degrees are much more prominent, look a Jaguar, a person with a Degree in DEI influenced marketing made those decisions and you want me to trust that you know what you are talking about cause a peace of paper says you where a good boy for 4 years? 

What's the "states narratives" worldwide,

Prove you've I've got  a brain?    

That's impossible I'm afraid , you just have a continuous  echo bouncing around your over large mongol shaped skull. 

Hitcounter

@Brunchfastfordinner if the Earth isn't Flat how would you prove it?

Factfinder

@Joeseph

 Hume goes way back to my high school days. But that's right, he didn't just dismiss incidents claimed to have been a miracle or the evidence it may have happened out of hand, it's just that the evidence for it not happening always stacks higher. Which so far when an answer is realized it turns out to have a natural explanation. Thanks, he snuck that one by me. 

Hitcounter

@Joeseph

- I didn't know math , philosophy , art were indoctrination...,do tell?

Anything that takes its information from a book is taking its information from a prescribed source, normally the universities Dean will decide the books ‘allowed’ these are the pillars of indoctrination. Art … have you seen modern art? The best art is on tiktok not in Harvard cause the best art is real art not ‘Taught art’ as for philosophy well name me a few modern philosophers as example, you will struggle cause we are along way from the O’leary’s, Watts, Ram Dass, of the 70’s and 80s that was half a century ago what has modern education produced? … Crying Jordan Peterson?

- Why who designed it?

The Sate Designed the modern education system in the 60s

- How many generals does it supply yearly?

Approx – Six

- Well you really were neglected by the educational system so I understand your fury

Rejected by what? A system that boxes off ideas? Glad I missed the education that produced modern libtards.

- What's the "states narratives" worldwide

Climate Change, Weapons Sales, Population Control, Trans Rights, Abortion Rights, Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, pretty much anything that doesn’t involve looking after citizens first. Remember during covid how they would send old folks from hospital with covid back to their care homes? Heath authorities admit this was a mistake but it was a mistake that occurred worldwide in every country.. that’s not how mistakes work they don’t randomly coordinate to align to a narrative but in 2022 the impossible happened, the exact same ‘mistake’ was made the world over all of a sudden the burden pensioners place on the state was alleviated a little… as planned!   

Joeseph

@Hitcounter

Anything that takes its information from a book is taking its information from a prescribed source, normally the universities Dean will decide the books ‘allowed’ these are the pillars of indoctrination.

So all,education is indoctrination,  OK I will stick with that and leave you believe in a flat earth.....deal?


 Art … have you seen modern art? The best art is on tiktok not in Harvard cause the best art is real art not ‘Taught art’

I'm a full time artist. That's your subjective opinion , nothing more. 



 as for philosophy well name me a few modern philosophers as example, you will struggle cause we are along way from the O’leary’s, Watts, Ram Dass, of the 70’s and 80s that was half a century ago what has modern education produced? … Crying Jordan Peterson?

Ram Dass  ..,.... Bwahahahahahahahahaha.....real name Richard Alpert ......seriously?

The Sate Designed the modern education system in the 60s

No , the one that taught you the earth was flat? Tik Tok?

Approx – Six

Name them?

Rejected by what? A system that boxes off ideas? Glad I missed the education that produced modern libtards.

Well  look at the alternative it's produces Flarards like you who suck up the words of assorted new age gurus , you're indoctrination.

Climate Change, Weapons Sales, Population Control, Trans Rights, Abortion Rights, Russia/Ukraine, Israel/Palestine, pretty much anything that doesn’t involve looking after citizens first

How are you looking after citizens?


. Remember during covid how they would send old folks from hospital with covid back to their care homes? Heath authorities admit this was a mistake but it was a mistake that occurred worldwide in every country.

Really?  You made that up right?

. that’s not how mistakes work they don’t randomly coordinate to align to a narrative but in 2022 the impossible happened,

" THEY" Who are this worldwide " THEY"?


 the exact same ‘mistake’ was made the world over all of a sudden the burden pensioners place on the state was alleviated a little… as planned!   

Ahh right "THEY " planned this worldwide ......thanks for the heads up.

Brunchfastfordinner

@Hitcounter
Yes

Hitcounter

@Joeseph

So all,education is indoctrination

- This is correct.

I'm a full time artists. That's your subjective opinion, nothing more

- Full Time means paid art not art for the sake of art, real art isn’t a Job, Jim Cary for example is a real artist as his work does not require payment. 

 

Ram Dass  ..,.... Bwahahahahahahahahaha.....real name Richard Alpert ......seriously?

- That's your subjective opinion, nothing more

Name them?

- I would but I’m not sure what’s their real name or their Dead name (an arrest able offence these days) it doesn’t matter though its estimated that 15000 Trans army personnel will be terminated day one of Trumps presidency, I’m sure they will be more than loud about it when the time comes. 

Well  look at the alternative it's produces Flarards like you who suck up the words of assorted new age gurus , you're indoctrination.

- I take from many sources, unlike ‘the edumacated’ I am able to hold 2 opposing views in my head at once, for example I personally Detest Israel, yet I can side with Trump and RFK Jr’s America first policy’s while also detesting their Israel position, this is something a higher –re-education centre will drill out of its recruits, its all black and white to universities. 

How are you looking after citizens?

Its not my job it’s the Job of those I pay my Taxes to, a broken promise that consistantly destabilises governments yet none have the gumption to see that their countries citizens are first and foremost.

Really?  Your point being?

- Globalisim is bad

" THEY" Who are this worldwide " THEY"?

- Globalists – Klaus Swhab, Bill Gates, George Soros. People like Ursula von der Leyen she is Head of the EU commission an unelected body that dictates EU policy, strangely she has more power from an unelected position that the state leaders within the EU. When I say they I mean Globalists. 

Ahh right "THEY " planned this worldwide ......thanks for the heads up.

- didn’t they? Last thing I remember the entire wold locked down at the same time for a virus they (This time we will go with the globalist WHO)  said naturally emerged yet it didn’t this was a lie, it emerged from Wuhan, but it came to Wuhan from the US in 2016 (source: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1517719113) 

For somebody who thinks their educated such as politicians to try and gaslight me is absurd for you see I am un-indoctrinated meaning I am free of pre-requisite thinking, something Ram Dass will teach, or Alan Watts, or even Nevel Godard if you want to get out there out there none the less you call yourself an artist as you crush the free though of a Ram Dass, a man with a PHD that was so profoundly changed by Drugs and living in India that he freed himself from the shackles of the corporate ladder.

My bet is you fear these paths because your educator told you ‘drugs are bad, don’t do drugs kids’ yet the best art, all the way from stoned apes cave painting to the modern masters like Olafur Eliasson have been in some way influenced by intoxication, a liberty universities frown upon case they are ‘on the square’

Joeseph

@Hitcounter

- This is correct.

Yet lack of eduction has you believing in a flat earth..

Full Time means paid art not art for the sake

Does it? Who decided this " THEY"?



Pof art, real art isn’t a Job

What makes something a " job"?



, 

So that's your preffered definition of a " real artist" how does non payment make his work "real" 

 That's your subjective opinion, nothing more

Yep,  he's also an excellent con man ......another of my opinions.

- I would but I’m not sure what’s their real name or their Dead name (an arrest able offence these days) it doesn’t matter though its estimated that 15000 Trans army personnel will be terminated day one of Trumps presidency, I’m sure they will be more than loud about it when the time comes. 

Ahh right you made that up also right?

- I take from many sources, unlike ‘the edumacated’ I am able to hold 2 opposing views in my head at once, for example I personally Detest Israel, yet I can side with Trump and RFK Jr’s America first policy’s while also detesting their Israel position, this is something a higher –re-education centre will drill out of its recruits, its all black and white to universities. 

You have differing opinions like most people your point ?

Its not my job it’s the Job of those I pay my Taxes to, a broken promise that consistantly destabilises governments yet none have the gumption to see that their countries citizens are first and foremost.

You don't like it ship out , it's a free world .

- Globalisim is bad

Is it , why?

- Globalists – Klaus Swhab, Bill Gates, George Soros. People like Ursula von der Leyen she is Head of the EU commission an unelected body that dictates EU policy, strangely she has more power from an unelected position that the state leaders within the EU. When I say they I mean Globalists. 

You really are into conspiracy lunacy aren't you?

Ahh right "THEY " planned this worldwide ......thanks for the heads up.

- didn’t they? Last thing I remember the entire wold locked down at the same time for a virus they (This time we will go with the globalist WHO) said naturally emerged yet it didn’t this was a lie, it emerged from Wuhan, but it came to Wuhan from the US in 2016 (source: https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1517719113) 

LOL 

For somebody who thinks their educated such as politicians to try and gaslight me is absurd for you see I am un-indoctrinated meaning I am free of pre-requisite thinking, something Ram Dass will teach, or Alan Watts, or even Nevel Godard if you want to get out there out there none the less you call yourself an artist as you crush the free though of a Ram Dass, a man with a PHD that was so profoundly changed by Drugs and living in India that he freed himself from the shackles of the corporate ladder.

He should be called Rammed As- , a two bit con man who's never uttrered an intelligible sentence in his life.

My bet is you fear these paths because your educator told you ‘drugs are bad, don’t do drugs kids’ yet the best art, all the way from stoned apes cave painting to the modern masters like Olafur Eliasson have been in some way influenced by intoxication, a liberty universities frown upon case they are ‘on the square’


Yes one would easily know drugs played a part in Eliassons thrashy tripe , do you know what he's worth? Thought you mentioned art is only art if done for arts sake? ZING 

All you've done is whined about eduction being indoctrination yet keep forcing your subjective views as being somehow superior , you're preaching nothing else.

So I'm still waiting for you to prove you're unindoctrinated Flat Earth theory?

Factfinder

@Joeseph

I give you credit for even making sense of his posts. 

just_sayin

Joeseph said:

@Factfinder

Just Lying is totally misrepresenting Humes argument , he tried this several times and I corrected him several
 times.

Just Lying mentions the improbability of lottery wins as an analogy , it's a false one as we know lotteries are won  even if the the odds were in the trillions , also highly improbable bridge hands are played and will be played without appealing to magic.

 Hume did not argue against the existence of miracles but only against the credibility of someone who claimed to have witnessed a miracle. That is not the same thing. Of course Hume disbelieved in the existence of miracles, but remember, his argument was made in the context of his work An Enquiry Into Human Understanding.

It's pretty obvious really we have never seen a resurrected man or a man walking on water , and we have had 2,000 years of not seeing such, we are on  pretty safe ground to assume that the claims are dubious to say the least.

I have not misrepresented Hume.  Hume defines a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature, which he argues are established by firm and unalterable experience. He posits that the evidence for the natural laws, as observed consistently throughout human history, outweighs the testimony supporting specific miraculous claims.  Unless you have some different definition of 'unalterable experience' then by definition Hume claims miracles don't occur. Since rare events do happen and are sometimes the explanation of things, Hume's argument is nothing more than special pleading.  He begins with the presupposition that miracles do not exist, and therefore there are no miracles.  I'm right in my criticisms, and you are again holding an argument that vanished into nothing in your hand.  

Joeseph

@just_sayin


I have not misrepresented Hume.



Yes you have and no matter how many times Humes arguments are  explained  you keep misrepresenting them ....

So here it is really simplified for you courtesy of My Tutor ......just bet you still totally misrepresent Hume........


.Explain Hume’s Argument Against Miracles

Firstly, we must begin with what Hume defines miracles as. Hume states that a miracle is “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity or by the interposition of some invisible agent”. By this, Hume means to suggest that a miracle is a breaking of a law of nature by the choice and action of a God or supernatural power.

Hume sets up this definition in order to counter with five main arguments.

1) “A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence”. Here, Hume means to suggest that a wise man considers which side is supported by the most evidence. Everitt calls this the proportionality principle. For example, if we take the miracle of Jesus walking on water from the bible, Hume would suggest that there is more evidence to support the fact people cannot walk on water rather than the one time that Jesus did, and so we should not believe it.

2) Hume also says that we must choose the lesser miracle. Hume here points to Ockham’s Razor as support for this, which basically states that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. In order for a miracle to be true, denial of the miracle would have to be more miraculous than its acceptance. If we took the example of Jesus being resurrected, Hume would suggest that we consider what is more likely: that those making the claim are mistaken, or that Jesus actually came back to life? Here Hume would argue we must logically choose the first option.

3) Hume also suggests that with all claims of miracles made, there is inadequate witness testimony. Witnesses must, according to Hume, be well educated and intelligent. They should have a reputation to lose and nothing to gain from their claim. There must be a “sufficient number” of witnesses in order for a claim to be considered. Hume also states that humans love the fantastic and want to believe in miracles, and believers desire to promote their religion. As a result, Hume argues that many, if not all, claims of miracles in current sources are inadequate and should be dismissed.

4) Following this, Hume also claims that miracles often come from “ignorant and barbarous nations”, making accounts of miracles unreliable. For example, many of the claims of miracles within the bible are made by poor, uneducated fishermen and peasants, which Hume argues is not an adequate source.

5) Finally, Hume argues that miracles in other religions cancel each other out. Miracles from Hinduism or Buddhism, he argues, cancels out those from Christianity of Islam. As such, Hume suggests that instead of picking just one to believe in, we should deny them all.


  I'm wrong in my criticisms, and you and am again  holding an argument that vanished into nothing in my hand.  


Yes,  I know I keep schooling you .......ZING 

polytheistwitch

Considering your fondness for commenting on people's genitalia I'm not sure a picture of you lounging on a eggplant is really the best choice.

Joeseph

@Factfinder


I give you credit for even making sense of his posts.

I guess it's the optimist in me hoping against hope he might try harder , I know it's doesn't work Just Lying being a prime example.

GnosticChristian

Argument Topic: The most worthy religions are the Gnostic sectors of all religions.

Gnostic Christians were dubbed the good Christians, in the days of inquisitions and Dark Ages. 

Given that Gnostics are the intelligentsia of all religions, they are the only right religion.

Gnostics have put away the things of children. Supernatural foolishness.

All the best religionists will have done the same.

polytheistwitch

Jesus Christ talk about patting yourself on the back.

just_sayin

@Joeseph
Hume never ever, no never, used the expression " choose the lesser miracle".  He emphatically said miracles were a violation of nature.  His mind was made up before looking at the evidence.  His is an argument of special pleading, which assumes facts not in evidence - such as there are no miracles. He can't know all of history, past and present.  Rare events happen and are the cause of some things.  Even when there would be a number of witnesses and evidence of miracles, Hume would deny them because of his circular reasoning 'miracles can't happen, because miracles never happen, even when there is evidence they did happen.'  Gee, when you write out what Hume believes he sounds a lot like @Factfinder when he says 'D'em eye witness testimonies, medical records, court certified evidence - that thar ain't evidence, cause I says it ain't evidence.'

Barnardot

@Hitcounter @polytheistwitch @Joseph @just_sayin ;so you think flight is real? .. have you ever heard of NASA's Ingenuity Mars Helicopter?, this is proof flight is not real

No, its proof that you are a total brainless loony, and you should not be on this site since you are an insult to the intelligence of any decent person.

polytheistwitch

People sitting and arguing that their religion is better it's just the dumbest thing ever. If you're genuinely practicing a religion then you've had some sort of a spiritual experience with the deity of that religion. And considering only a small amount of religions are monotheists you may have several relationships involving different deities from different pantheons. It has to do with relationships and I know Christians like to throw that word around like they're the only ones that have it but that is what religion is it's a relationship with a deity or deities. And there are all sorts of ways that religions look good on paper or don't look good on paper. The people following them can be jerks. Especially if that religion gets mixed up in politics or culture as a way to make yourself better than everyone else. Bros can take over religion like nobody's business.

Barnardot

@polytheistwitch ;People sitting and arguing that their religion is better it's just the dumbest thing ever.

Well, it is really but I think it is a natural thing for people to root for what they belong to...its just our ego which is okay to a certain extent. For example, I might support my local football team which is the New York Paraplegic Delinquent Midgets and say that they are the best and only real team in the world. Its all harmless fun having a bit of innocent rivalry....we do it all the time. 

But when it comes to religion, the problem is that religious people take it seriously and sneer at other religions believing that they are all going to be tortured and burn in Hell forever. 

And here's a thought for you anyway. When you think about it, religious people are really atheists anyway because they are against all religions except their own. It's just that I disbelieve one more religion than they do

polytheistwitch

The fact that you can't care about anything other than sports isn't relevant to me or the discussion so please quit responding to things you don't even believe in anything that's being discussed so there's no reason to put anything into it nobody cares that you don't believe. Nobody cares what your opinion is because your opinion is that all theist are hate-filled bigots when you're as much as a hateful bigot.

Factfinder

@just_sayin

Gee, when you write out what Hume believes he sounds a lot like @Factfinder when he says 'D'em eye witness testimonies, medical records, court certified evidence - that thar ain't evidence, cause I says it ain't evidence.'

Sigh, you have no evidence, you don't even know what it is or what the word means. Will you ever grow up? While you're purposely lying around the forum, you keep dodging my question.

"Yes" or "no" only. Do you think the Israelis ignored gods command to kill homosexuals as abominations for centuries in the bronze age just because you can't read it on the web that they obeyed?


ChatGPT: Was the miracle of Calanda proven?

ChatGPT said:

The "Miracle of Calanda" is a famous event that took place in 1640 in the Spanish village of Calanda, where a young farmer named Miguel Pellicer was reportedly healed through the miraculous restoration of his amputated leg. According to accounts, Pellicer had lost his right leg two years earlier after an accident and amputation at the Zaragoza hospital. On March 29, 1640, his leg allegedly reappeared overnight while he was sleeping.

Investigation and Documentation

The miracle was investigated at the time by religious authorities. A formal process, led by the Archbishop of Zaragoza, gathered testimonies from witnesses, including Pellicer’s family, local residents, and medical professionals who had been involved in the amputation. In 1641, the Archbishop issued a document certifying the miracle, declaring it an act of divine intervention through the intercession of the Virgin Mary, specifically Nuestra Señora del Pilar (Our Lady of the Pillar).

Skepticism and Challenges

Despite its formal documentation, modern historians, scientists, and skeptics question the verifiability of the event. Common challenges to the claim include:

1. Lack of Scientific Evidence: Medicine in the 17th century lacked rigorous documentation standards. The records are primarily anecdotal and based on testimony rather than empirical evidence.

2. Religious Context: The event occurred during a time of strong religious belief and political pressure to affirm the power of the Catholic Church, which might have influenced the interpretation and promotion of the event.

3. Alternative Explanations: Skeptics suggest the possibility of mistaken identity, exaggeration, or other natural explanations rather than supernatural intervention.

Religious Perspective

For believers, especially those devoted to Our Lady of the Pillar, the event is a profound sign of divine intervention. It remains a significant aspect of Marian devotion in Spain.

Conclusion

While the Miracle of Calanda is well-documented within the framework of religious and historical accounts, it is not "proven" in a scientific or empirical sense. Its acceptance largely depends on personal faith and perspective.

Why did the leg need to go through a convalescence process after it was "miraculously" healed? It was reattached weak and atrophied, and slightly shorter.... But while it was in the hole in the ground, surely it was already reduced to simple bone. Why did "mary" half- the rebuilding and reattachment in such a way as to present the same symptoms of a leg that had been routinely bound up for years?

https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/3oz4fd/is_there_any_good_skeptical_not_skeptoid_reply_to/

Another question you'll dodge.

just_sayin

@Factfinder

The Miracle of Calanda, involving Miguel Juan Pellicer, is a well-documented event from 1640 where Pellicer's amputated leg was reportedly restored. Here is a comprehensive list of evidence and testimonies related to the case:

## Evidence for Miguel Juan Pellicer's Amputated Leg Being Regrown

1. Testimony from medical professionals involved in the amputation

2. Witness accounts of Pellicer's condition before and after the alleged miracle

3. Official documentation and investigation by local authorities

4. Canonical process and trial testimonies

## Witnesses and Their Testimonies

### Medical Staff

1. **Dr. Juan de Estanga** (Professor of Surgery at the University of Saragossa)

   - Performed the amputation

   - Confirmed under oath that he amputated Pellicer's leg

   - Recognized Pellicer as the same man whose leg he had amputated

2. **Diego Millaruelo** (Master of Surgery at the hospital)

   - Helped with the operation

   - Testified under oath that he "saw it cut off"

3. **Juan Lorenzo Garcia** (Young practitioner)

   - Assisted in the procedure

   - Buried the amputated leg in the hospital cemetery

4. **Miguel Beltrán** (Doctor)

   - Declared they had decided to cut the leg due to its phlegmonous and damaged condition

### Other Witnesses

- Multiple individuals who saw Pellicer as a one-legged beggar in Saragossa

- Local judge who examined Pellicer after the alleged miracle

- Parish priest Don Marco Seguer and royal notary Miguel Andréu, who collected testimonies

## Evidence Supporting Pellicer's Status as a Beggar in Saragossa

1. Pellicer was provided with necessary authorization to beg at the Sanctuary of the Pillar

2. He was described as a familiar sight to many citizens of Saragossa

3. Regular check-ups and treatment by Dr. Estanga at the hospital

## Explanation for the Weakened Condition of the Regrown Leg

According to eyewitnesses and the canonical process:

- The leg was pale

- Smaller in size and muscular mass

- Perfectly vital and allowed him to walk

- Required rehabilitation, consistent with medical practices of 17th-century Spain

This condition is similar to what might be expected of a reattached limb, with reduced circulation and muscle atrophy due to disuse.

Citations:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_of_Calanda

[2] https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/3oz4fd/is_there_any_good_skeptical_not_skeptoid_reply_to/

[3] https://romalocutaest.com/2024/05/17/the-historicity-of-the-miracle-of-calanda/

[4] https://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/english_pdf/Calanda.pdf

[5] https://www.deepertruthcatholics.com/single-post/2020/01/07/the-guardian-angel-the-eucharistic-miracle-of-calanda-spain-1640

[6] https://www.churchpop.com/god-cured-amputee-the-astonishing-miracle-of-calanda/

[7] https://biblicalscholarship.wordpress.com/2022/03/12/interview-with-vittorio-messori-concerning-the-miraculous-healing-of-miguel-juan-pellicer-severed-leg/

[8] https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2013/05/19/adam-and-eve-conundrum-solved-and-an-amputated-leg-restored-by-god/

Your pathetic and desperate argument is that people in 1640 couldn't count to 2 or see that a leg was missing.  Has your hate of God made you that blind?  There is no debate that Pellicer's leg was amputated.  6 different medical persons testified to either sawing the leg off, seeing it sawed off, seeing Pellicer in the hospital with one leg, or after it had regrown to seeing his leg regrown after examining it.  Sorry, buddy, your hate for God does not cancel out facts and evidence.  And those are facts and evidence.

Why was the leg not 'perfect' at first when it was regrown??  I can only speculate, but the AI says its condition was consistent with a reattachment.  

Factfinder

@just_sayin

Where's the evidence part? You've spammed this debunked crap repeatedly, ( your pseudo logic as well)  you know it isn't evidence so what do you hope to gain? 

Why do you cower from this question? Ashamed of your elf faith, I know. "Yes" or "no" only. Do you think the Israelis ignored gods command to kill homosexuals as abominations for centuries in the bronze age just because you can't read it on the web that they obeyed?

Factfinder

@just_sayin

Why was the leg not 'perfect' at first when it was regrown??  I can only speculate, but the AI says its condition was consistent with a reattachment.

No deceitful one that wasn't the question. Lying doesn't get you anywhere. Have you read the bible? You know your elf god is based on that collection myths so you should read it one day as it says don't lie.

The question you just dodged: Why did "mary" half- the rebuilding and reattachment in such a way as to present the same symptoms of a leg that had been routinely bound up for years?

Now the one you keep running from: "Yes" or "no" only. Do you think the Israelis ignored gods command to kill homosexuals as abominations for centuries in the bronze age just because you can't read it on the web that they obeyed?

Joeseph

@just_sayin

Hume never ever, no never, used the expression " choose the lesser miracle".

As usual you're incapable of comprehending the point.


 He emphatically said miracles were a violation of nature

Which is true.

. His mind was made up before looking at the evidence.

No, yet again you're lying    he points this out at the very start ..... so again you've been caught lying.......

 “A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence”. Here, Hume means to suggest that a wise man considers which side is supported by the most evidence. Everitt calls this the proportionality principle. For example, if we take the miracle of Jesus walking on water from the bible, Hume would suggest that there is more evidence to support the fact people cannot walk on water rather than the one time that Jesus did, and so we should not believe it.


 His is an argument of special pleading, which assumes facts not in evidence - such as there are no miracles

Read above , stop lying.


. He can't know all of history, past and present.

Why who says he does?

 Rare events happen and are the cause of some things

Yes you tried using false analogies like bridge hands and winning the lottery until I corrected your st-pidity.

So lottery wins are miracles , seriously?


. Even when there would be a number of witnesses and evidence of miracles, Hume would deny them because of his circular reasoning 'miracles can't happen, because miracles never happen,

You mean what you claim as evidence .....like Jesus walking in water .....Hume would suggest that there is more evidence to support the fact people cannot walk on water rather than the one time that Jesus did, and so we should not believe it.

Theres Hume saying the opposite of what youre accusing him of


 even when there is evidence they did happen.'

You're doing it again as in saying everyone must accept what you call evidence because it's true proving your argument is the circular one and is the special pleading one but as usual you accuse your opponents of doing exactly what they don't but you always do.


Gee, when you write out what Hume believes he sounds a lot like @Factfinder when he says 'D'em eye witness testimonies, medical records, court certified evidence - that thar ain't evidence, cause I says it ain't evidence.'

Because you are not talking about Humes argument you're talking about yet another strawman argument you constructed and attempt to attribute to Hume and as usual you're caught in your lying.

You really are obsessed with FF , he's really got to you hasn't he?

Also Hume also claimed if one accepts miracle claims in one religion they must accept them in all yet all religions disagree and call each other wrong making all miracle yet again bunk.

ZING

Hitcounter

@Barnardot

Hitcounter Said: So you think flight is real? .. have you ever heard of NASA's Ingenuity Mars Helicopter?, this is proof flight is not real

To which Bernard the Brainless responded: No, its proof that you are a total brainless loony, and you should not be on this site since you are an insult to the intelligence of any decent person.

Hitcounters retort: Ok so what you have tried to snobaly skip over is the lack of oxygen (Air) on mars so we have a helicopter flying around the red planet but no Air required for lift? Now call me brainless but im inclined to question Nasa’s pictures and confirmations that the Helicopter is in use but its use is no possible without Air.

Of course Bernard the Brainless would never question the Nasa Holy Scripture for fear of damnation to the ‘fringe’ of society but over here on the fringe the Lies Nasa spews are quite visible almost laughable if it wasn’t such a disgusting ploy