Centifolia's Waterfall
He isnt a "being". He is God
Stop forcing the argument when you already know the answer
Because it doesn't matter whether or not what is being claimed it true
So you recognize the research as valid but you still deny the existence of God?
How would one supernatural claim being true, prove every supernatural claim? It doesn't follow.
One undebunkable proof is enough to change everything, apparently.
No it's not, science is fallible, science doesn't know everything because science is a means of investigating things.
So you are claiming that the research done is wrong?
Science has already abandoned you. Ignorance is a choice, my friend.
I read the article if that is what you are asking.
I can see that you did not raise any argument about the research done and the credibility of the scientists. Gee, I wonder why
Why didn't they put that knowledge out there to begin with?
Simple: no one's asking.
And how does it follow a god exists from this? Why not fairies? why not spirits?
Because if fairies and spirits exist, then so does the rest of the paranormal world. And that includes God.
How do you know that this was caused by the supernatural though?
Anything that cannot be explained through science is considered supernatural. Simple
How do you know it isn't following the laws of nature, but we just don't understand how it was able be well preserved?
Preservation is easy. The painting itself is impossible.
Because the definition of miracle is an event not ascribable to human power or the laws of nature and consequently attributed to a supernatural, especially divine, agency.
And here we have the miracle that proves God.
How long will your denial last?
What makes you think that the laws of the universe apply to the maker of the universe?
God is eternal. The universe is not.
You would be able to explain, the reasoning within the article that shows a god existing, no? Or the reasoning on why to believe a god exists, no?
You did not read the research, have you?
So they weren't directly lying, they were being misleading, by leaving out key information. either way, it's dishonest isn't it?
A persons inability to ask questions is his own fault.
The answer is readily available. You just have to ask, it's that simple.
If everything in it was true, that just means a painting was really well preserved beyond our understanding, that just means we need a better understanding, not that a god had anything to do with it
If its just age, i wouldn't find a problem in your argument. But the thing is, the test results show that not only was the painting impossible to be done by human hands, but also practically inexplainable due to how intricate it is, to the point that not even modern technology can imitate it.
Only denial can get you out of here.
im too tired right now.
Just passing by to say that I read your argument and I might reply tomorrow. :)
I have a low research in sociology. But in my opinion, I would answer that civilization has made us monogamous
In prehistoric times, it is recommended that the superior/riches male should have as much wives as he can support. This will allow him to have alot of descendants and considering that the survival rate is low, reproduction is vital.
However, as our population grew and life-span increased, the need for reproduction was replaced with the need for loyal mates. We no longer need the rich to bear more children but we do need children whom will raised properly and will be efficient members of the society.
Cheating is an act of disloyalty and it proves that he/she wouldn't be a good parent. It is frowned upon by the civilized world.
Thats my scientific opinion without using any moral arguments. But I cannot be so sure. My research here is weak
The content of the two articles is not the same.
One is unreviewed, the other is compressed.
Yes, it means they lied about it not fading, so they can't be trusted.
Theres a difference between lying and not speaking. They are ready to answer any questions but it is not their loss if you wont ask.
They lied about it not having any paint on it. They lied about NASA testing it.
sigh
Technically speaking, it was the crowds who caused the misinformation not the Church. You cannot just lie about a persons report as it can get you arrested for Defamation.
All the reports are readily available online. All are approved by scientific agencies and all you can do now is to deny the findings. Not that it concerns me, though.
Read the top of your source "http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4201"
It was made by the same author. And I believe that the skeptoid link is the compressed one as it was published just 3 years ago.
My source already addresses that. See the paragraph with a large font.
sigh
Your link did not work. But dont worry, I know where it came from.
Indeed, it has been admitted by the church that the painting has undergone several restorations but does that changed anything?
It has survived 500 years of exposure to candles, weather, human hands and insects. Survived a bomb and acid exposure. Dont tell me you are going to force a simple argument and deny the bigger picture?
P.S
Dr. Callahan is a devote Catholic and a supporter of the Guadalupe.
The documentation is irrelevant since the painting is a fake.
Suit yourself.
The reason why we rule than land, sea and sky is because of our superior intelligence
Precisely. If evolution seeks adaptability, it would have improved the body of small rodents but instead, evolution decided to create humans who can not only create weapons but also test everything he knows.
Philosophy never improved our survival rate. And yet, it exists. Would you still believe that evolution is a random chance?
I vote for intelligent design.
sigh
I have read much of those so called "debunked". All of them ended up as laughing stock in Christian forums. Hell, did you even read the comments below your source?
All of them are mocking the writer primarily because:
1. It ignored the fact that the tilma lasted for 500 years when it should have decayed in 5.
2. It avoids the topics that NASA tested it and came to the conclusion that it was not painted with human hands nor made up of any known material.
3. They forces the argument on lack of documentation or contradicting records. But seriously, do you really expect a 500 year old aztect tribe to write accurately?
we are the most adaptable to change
No were not. The most adaptable to change are ants, rats, cockroaches, grass and phytoplanktons.By the way, ever heard of carnivorous plants?
If evolution seeks to create the most flexible species, then it shouldnt have created humans who focuses on intelligence. Humans are one of the weakest predators in the planet, we have no body weapon to use and yet, we now rule the land, sea and sky. Gee, I wonder why
Using theism, all of those equates to the same thing.
God, Heaven, Hell and Prophets.
Perhaps as ridiculous as the purpose of evolution and existence of life, isnt it?
Evolution is real, but why does it happen? If it seeks survival of the fittest, cockroaches has already won. If it seeks long life, trees has made it to the top. But no, the one who sits on the top of the food chain is the one who has no claws, no fangs, not even a good birthrate.
And to add insult to injury, this animals are the only ones who question his beliefs.
I choose intelligent design over nihilistic denials
