ApolloHoax.net

Off Topic => Beyond Belief => Topic started by: LionKing on January 12, 2017, 08:11:23 AM

Title: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 12, 2017, 08:11:23 AM
Dear all,

I want to view your scientific explanations for the so-called miracles of curing and visions as the local TVs here propagate this matter every now and then. One of the many of what are described as miracles of Saint Charbel Makhlouf was a woman saying that the physician told her she should have a cancer surgery, but she went to shrine of the Saint and prayed. At midnight she saw a man dressing in black who told her he is the saint, burnt her hand , and told her she is healed. When she went to the physician he told her she is healed miraculously, according to her.
There are many similar stories, and although I know that many investigations should be done before one claims a miracle cure took place (right diagnosis, psychological issues, taking medicine while praying, spontaneous healing, etc) I still don't understand the visionary issue .. any thoughts?
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 12, 2017, 11:22:56 AM
Do they have medical records to prove they had the condition in the first place and to prove that they no longer have it?  Because if they don't, they can claim anything.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Cat Not Included on January 12, 2017, 01:14:37 PM
Dear all,

I want to view your scientific explanations for the so-called miracles of curing and visions as the local TVs here propagate this matter every now and then. One of the many of what are described as miracles of Saint Charbel Makhlouf was a woman saying that the physician told her she should have a cancer surgery, but she went to shrine of the Saint and prayed. At midnight she saw a man dressing in black who told her he is the saint, burnt her hand , and told her she is healed. When she went to the physician he told her she is healed miraculously, according to her.
There are many similar stories, and although I know that many investigations should be done before one claims a miracle cure took place (right diagnosis, psychological issues, taking medicine while praying, spontaneous healing, etc) I still don't understand the visionary issue .. any thoughts?

There are many stories in which costumed do-gooders shooting laser beams out of their eyes or imbued with adamantium bones or wielding magic lassos defeat evil-doers. How does science explain them?

People can say anything they want; without fact-checking it, what they say could be fictional, imagined, a lie, an exaggeration; heck, it could be literally anything.

Millions of people will suffer from various illnesses and injuries every day. Many of them will recover, many without any notable treatment. Many of them will pray in between getting sick and recovering.

Meanwhile, more than a thousand people die of cancer every day in the US alone. An enormous number of them either pray or have people praying for them. But thousands of them still die.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 13, 2017, 03:16:57 AM
Yes Cat I said there is spontaneous remission, what I am discussing is the vision and operation reported by not only her but many other people. But I think it is not our, or my capability now to investigate it .. it will need close investigation..
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 13, 2017, 05:24:43 AM
and this is very conencted with stigmata..they all say to have wounds after the surgery or those like Jesus..
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Zakalwe on January 13, 2017, 08:26:17 AM
The woo (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo) is strong in this thread.....
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 14, 2017, 09:41:52 AM
The woo (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo) is strong in this thread.....

On the contrary, the thread is to find a perfect scientific explanation not a pseudoscientific one
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: theteacher on January 14, 2017, 07:01:07 PM
The woo (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo) is strong in this thread.....

On the contrary, the thread is to find a perfect scientific explanation not a pseudoscientific one

It's a miracle that men went to the Moon in the sixties and came back alive, don't you think?
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: bknight on January 15, 2017, 12:01:13 PM
The woo (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo) is strong in this thread.....

On the contrary, the thread is to find a perfect scientific explanation not a pseudoscientific one

It's a miracle that men went to the Moon in the sixties and came back alive, don't you think?

No miracle just understanding the science and technology of the journey.  Receive the necessary funding for the project, a very important step and one which has prevented a return to deep space.  Then build and perfect the hardware to accomplish the task.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Zakalwe on January 15, 2017, 01:35:16 PM
The woo (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo) is strong in this thread.....

On the contrary, the thread is to find a perfect scientific explanation not a pseudoscientific one

Then we wouldn't be using anecdotal accounts. It would be very difficult to build a compelling convincing case when all there appears to be is media reports and anecdotal records.
It's worth remembering that there is not one single event in all of human history that has been proven to have a supernatural cause.

It's a miracle that men went to the Moon in the sixties and came back alive, don't you think?
The definition of a miracle is something that is inexplicable by reason and can only be attributed to a supernatural being or deity. I cannot think of a single occurrence in the Apollo program that can only be explained by invoking a supernatural being. Not a single one. So, by that definition, I do not think that it's a miracle. It's a testimony to hard work, inventiveness, science, mathematics, engineering, bravery, individual sacrifice and determination.
No room here for invisible father-figures that live in the clouds.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 15, 2017, 02:59:22 PM
zakalwe we are searching if science studied similar anecdotes and could understand the reason behind them
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 16, 2017, 11:52:51 AM
Yes.  Every time science has looked into them, the reason that comes back is "fraud."
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: theteacher on January 17, 2017, 04:49:01 PM
It's a miracle that men went to the Moon in the sixties and came back alive, don't you think?
The definition of a miracle is something that is inexplicable by reason and can only be attributed to a supernatural being or deity.

I think it is more productive to look at the origin of the word miracle: Middle English: via Old French from Latin miraculum object of wonder, from mirari to wonder, from mirus wonderful. From https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/miracle.

Quote
I cannot think of a single occurrence in the Apollo program that can only be explained by invoking a supernatural being. Not a single one. So, by that definition, I do not think that it's a miracle. It's a testimony to hard work, inventiveness, science, mathematics, engineering, bravery, individual sacrifice and determination.
No room here for invisible father-figures that live in the clouds.

I couldn't agree more.

Yet I was trying to bring a point across to Lionking. Hence the question.

My point is: The concept of miracles is incommensurable with the concept of science. The two concepts belong to different realms of our way to deal with reality.

Science is an instrumental way to deal with reality, that makes us able to explain and make predictions about said reality. Miracles is a way to describe personal experiences with occurences, that make us wonder and fill us with awe. Thus a miracle is a way to describe a personal experience.

If we look at miracles from that point of view it becomes clear, that what is a miracle to some people, is not necessarily a miracle to others.

In accordance with Michael Shermer in his book "The Believing Brain" I think, that the propensity to adopt concepts such as miracles is hardwired into our brains, and that it takes a lot of hard disciplined work to put those ways of thinking aside, when dealing with reality in a scientific way.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 18, 2017, 03:43:08 AM
It's a miracle that men went to the Moon in the sixties and came back alive, don't you think?
The definition of a miracle is something that is inexplicable by reason and can only be attributed to a supernatural being or deity.

I think it is more productive to look at the origin of the word miracle: Middle English: via Old French from Latin miraculum object of wonder, from mirari to wonder, from mirus wonderful. From https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/miracle.

Quote
I cannot think of a single occurrence in the Apollo program that can only be explained by invoking a supernatural being. Not a single one. So, by that definition, I do not think that it's a miracle. It's a testimony to hard work, inventiveness, science, mathematics, engineering, bravery, individual sacrifice and determination.
No room here for invisible father-figures that live in the clouds.

I couldn't agree more.

Yet I was trying to bring a point across to Lionking. Hence the question.

My point is: The concept of miracles is incommensurable with the concept of science. The two concepts belong to different realms of our way to deal with reality.

Science is an instrumental way to deal with reality, that makes us able to explain and make predictions about said reality. Miracles is a way to describe personal experiences with occurences, that make us wonder and fill us with awe. Thus a miracle is a way to describe a personal experience.

If we look at miracles from that point of view it becomes clear, that what is a miracle to some people, is not necessarily a miracle to others.

In accordance with Michael Shermer in his book "The Believing Brain" I think, that the propensity to adopt concepts such as miracles is hardwired into our brains, and that it takes a lot of hard disciplined work to put those ways of thinking aside, when dealing with reality in a scientific way.

My idea too is that there are natural laws going on. Even Saint Augustine says:  "Miracles are not contrary to nature, but only contrary to what we know about nature". So whatever is going on deserves a look fro science. This seems to be an interesting book https://www.amazon.com/Looking-Miracle-Weeping-Stigmata-Visions/dp/1573926809
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Zakalwe on January 18, 2017, 05:52:18 AM


In accordance with Michael Shermer in his book "The Believing Brain" I think, that the propensity to adopt concepts such as miracles is hardwired into our brains, and that it takes a lot of hard disciplined work to put those ways of thinking aside, when dealing with reality in a scientific way.
We are hardwired to look for connections where there are none. It's better (from a natural selection point of view) to default to false positives. That rustle in he savannah grass is a tiger...RUN!!! That response means you live another day compares to "That rustle is nothing" and you becoming dinner.
Similarly, there's almost certainly a strong social and Darwinian selective pressure for belief in the supernatural and woo. That doesn't mean that there actually is supernatural and woo though.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 18, 2017, 11:26:38 AM
I mean, it's quite obvious to me how we'd want to start investigating claims of miracles.  I've said it before.  You start by producing comprehensive medical records to show that there was a condition that is now gone.  Until and unless that's done, it's pointless to speculate more.  The simplest answer there will remain "fraud," and the mere claims from people that it isn't will do nothing to disprove that.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on January 19, 2017, 02:57:19 AM
I mean, it's quite obvious to me how we'd want to start investigating claims of miracles.  I've said it before.  You start by producing comprehensive medical records to show that there was a condition that is now gone.  Until and unless that's done, it's pointless to speculate more.  The simplest answer there will remain "fraud," and the mere claims from people that it isn't will do nothing to disprove that.

http://www.is-there-a-god.info/life/tenhealings/

there are such things perhaps, but their explanation might be "spontaneous remission" that can happen to anyone and its answers should be found within science
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 19, 2017, 11:23:22 AM
No, that page is insufficient.  That's not comprehensive medical records.  That's vague medical descriptions.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: nomuse on January 21, 2017, 12:34:57 AM
Maybe it is my current sleep deprivation talking, but isn't there a methodological problem with proofing a miracle? Pretty much by definition, a miracle is when no naturalistic explanation is possible. But the list of possible naturalistic explanations seems near-infinite. How do you know when you've passed the Holmsian and there does not remain even unlikely explanations?
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 21, 2017, 11:39:01 AM
I do think that you can eliminate the basics--you can prove that it isn't fraud or the natural course of a disease or similar.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on February 03, 2017, 09:18:56 AM
 Sophy Burnham

https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-F-_u_n-damuKGwLR/Fingerprints%20Of%20God%20[The%20Search%20For%20The%20Science%20Of%20Spirituality]_djvu.txt

"When she was ten or eleven, she was out riding with her father on their remote Maryland farm

"My father said to me, 'For some reason the horses are really spooking. ' Because they were
dancing all over the place. And I said, 'Well, of course they are, they're feeling all this electricity in
the air.' He said, 'Oh? Is there electricity in the air?' And that was the first time that I realized, Oh,
not everybody feels this. Isn't that interesting? I just assumed that everybody was intimately attuned."

I wrote down her comment and circled it in my notes. As I talked with more people, I would find
that mystical adults were once mystical children, as if they were genetically wired for the spiritual.

Over the next thirty years, Sophy would attend Smith College, stray from her Episcopal upbringing,
and dabble in atheism. She would marry a NewYork Times reporter and give birth to two girls. In her
thirties, the part of her psyche that was a spiritual nomad broke free. She began to seek answers from
a Hindu guru and Buddhist meditation. Sophy arrived at age forty-two with teenaged girls, a caring
husband, a glittering social life, and a demanding career as a freelance magazine writer.

"I was happy, and yet there was something deeply missing," Sophy said. "And it was a deep, deep
longing that couldn't be satisfied. I remember looking in the mirror and thinking, Is this all? And then
thinking, I have everything. I have a loving husband and a house and children and friends and a
career.Why am I yearning for something else? And I didn't know what I was yearning for."

She found it on assignment. Town & Country magazine sent her to Costa Rica and Peru to profile
the World Wildlife Fund. As an afterthought, she added a side trip to Machu Picchu, the sacred Inca
mountain ruins in Peru.

She was sitting in the airport in San Jose, Costa Rica, when she had a premonition of the mystical
experience to come.

"Suddenly, I saw everything shining, shining, and the people were shining," she
recalled. "Everyone was luminous, and it was so profound that I just sat at my table, I just shook, with
tears streaming down my face, it was so beautiful. And I thought, Oh well, that s it. That s as good as
it gets."

She was wrong. Two days later, when she was climbing the terraces of Machu Picchu with a group
of other tourists, "I felt a nagging little chord in me, saying, 'You've got to go away, you've got to go
away. You don't have much time. Hurry. Hurry. ' "

She left her companions and scrambled up to the terraces, where she could be alone. She sat down,
closed her eyes, and instantly was in "another place."

"The first thing that happened was frightening," Sophy said, looking into the middle distance. She
spoke slowly, carefully, as if she were narrating an event she was witnessing in that very moment. I
can do justice to her story only by repeating it verbatim.

"The first thing that happened was the sound of a hollow darkness. I've never heard it except there.
It was very, very big — sort of like an oncoming train — but I knew it was in my ears, it was not
external. And then there was a hand at the back of my neck, pressing me very strongly down.
Everything is dark. Everything is black. And a voice that said, 'You belong to me.' And my response
was, 'If 'you are God. I belong to God.' And immediately everything turned to light."



She paused for ten, fifteen seconds, as if absorbing the light.

"The rest of the time, I was captivated in this mystical revelation. I was shown things that I don't
even have the wit to ask questions about," Sophy said. I thought of Saint Paul's vision of third heaven,
when he claimed he was "caught up in paradise," and "heard inexpressible things, things that man is
not permitted to tell."-

"I don't remember most of it now," Sophy said, reeling me back to the moment. "But I do remember
two things very vividly. One was the sense of seeing the beginnings and ends of the world — how it all
began. And the other was this image — it's very difficult to describe — of electrons or atoms being
swept along in the path of the hem of the garment of God. I think it was the passing of the Holy Spirit,
which I could not see, because to see that would blind me."

Sophy laughed self-consciously, embarrassed to place herself in the company of Moses watching
the back of God from the cleft of the rock.

"And seeing the aftereffects! It was all love and joy and sparkling particles, swarming up and
circling — it was just exquisite. And knowing that everything is going to be all right. It's that idea of
Saint Julian of Norwich, although I didn't know it at the time: 'All shall be well and all shall be well
and all manner of things will be well. -

"And then, slowly, slowly, slowly, coming like a turtle up to the surface of the water again, I
opened my eyes. And I was blinded by the light. It was piercingly painful so I shut my eyes again.
And I went back to the spiritual light for a while, and then came out again, and when I opened my eyes
this time, I could see. And I realized the whole thing had taken forty-five minutes, a huge amount of
time. And I realized I had to hurry for the bus. And I came galloping and springing like a gazelle
down the terraces, my heart filled with joy! And watching this light radiate off my hands and light off
my arms and light off the grasses and the trees burning with light, everything flaring!

"I suppose that's what God sees when he sees us," Sophy reflected, turning to look into my eyes.
"Just light. Nothing else. And then I got on the bus and I noticed that a blood vessel had burst in the
back of my hand about the size of a quarter. It startled me, but also pleased me because it meant that
yes, something had happened. And other people knew it. I remember this university professor coming
up to me and sitting next to me and saying something like, 'Something happened to you, didn't it?' I
said, 'Yes,' and that was all."

I sat immobilized by her story. I felt like a body surfer who had been slammed down by a wave.
Then I asked Sophy a question that many a neurologist has pondered as well.

"Did you think, Gosh, I just had a temporal lobe seizure!"

"Oh yes! Absolutely that occurred to me!" Sophy admitted happily. "Was that an epileptic fit? Did
I have some kind of electrical burnout of the brain? But everything seemed to be functioning," she
said, adding that nothing like this had recurred in the past twenty years.

She leaned forward, speaking urgently.

"The experience is not important," Sophy said, and then she laughed. "I've just spent fifteen
minutes telling you about an experience and now I tell you — and I cannot reiterate it enoughs — the
experience is not what was important. It's changing you on a cellular level that is important. It's
providing the hope and joy that's important.""

any thoughts?


Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Allan F on February 03, 2017, 11:06:08 AM
Petit mal.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on February 03, 2017, 12:43:18 PM
Petit mal.

What disease exactly? She said it occurred to her it might be epilepsy but throughout the tears no seizures occurred to her and these were rare events
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Flookie on February 11, 2017, 10:04:09 PM
Petit mal.

What disease exactly? She said it occurred to her it might be epilepsy but throughout the tears no seizures occurred to her and these were rare events

Most seizures don't induce loss of consciousness or convulsions and in some people they are rare occurences. It's a reasonable explanation.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on February 12, 2017, 04:18:06 PM
Petit mal.

What disease exactly? She said it occurred to her it might be epilepsy but throughout the tears no seizures occurred to her and these were rare events

Most seizures don't induce loss of consciousness or convulsions and in some people they are rare occurences. It's a reasonable explanation.

Can you provide a reference for the rare ones and what is their characteristics? Because I have been reading scientific articles about spontaneous mystical experiences and none provided this explanation
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on February 13, 2017, 04:24:55 AM

Quote
Most seizures don't induce loss of consciousness or convulsions and in some people they are rare occurences. It's a reasonable explanation.


"Conclusion
Considerable progress has been made in recent decades elucidating the neurobiologic
correlates of altered states of consciousness. In particular, there has been considerable
suggestive evidence bearing on the evolutionary neurological foundations of religious
behavior and mystical experience (Joseph, 2001; Saver & Rabin, 1997). The data from
this study add to the accumulating evidence that the temporal lobe is not differentially
involved in the generation of mystical states (Bradford, 2013; Devinsky & Lai, 2008;
Kelly & Grosso, 2007). Mystical experience does not appear to be associated commonly
with seizures, although features of introvertive mysticism are more common than
extrovertive; nor does mystical experience appear to be associated with any one particular
region of the brain."
https://med.virginia.edu/perceptual-studies/wp-content/uploads/sites/267/2015/11/mystical-experience-RBB.pdf


Also http://www.andrewnewberg.com/research-blog/2013/9/26/are-all-religious-experiences-related-to-disorders-such-as-schizophrenia-or-temporal-lobe-epilepsy

"This brings up the point that "normal" people can have normal or abnormal religious experiences, and "abnormal" people can have normal or abnormal religious experiences. Distinguishing between each of these groups is the difficult task of neuroscience"
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on February 13, 2017, 11:29:14 AM
Can you provide a reference for the rare ones and what is their characteristics? Because I have been reading scientific articles about spontaneous mystical experiences and none provided this explanation

Maybe you should have studied about seizures first.  It's not in the best interests of the people providing claims of mystical reasoning to say, "Oh, no, wait, the science is pretty clear on this and proves that we are probably wrong."
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: sandopan on September 10, 2017, 12:10:40 PM
There is surely a lot of fraud in many cases.  If the audience is predisposed to believe, they may not need much persuasion.

That said, we haven't figured out everything about how the universe works yet, so there are definitely still unexplained phenomenon.  One certainly could attribute miraculous causes to something not currently understood, but I think someone taking this approach should be prepared to experience a lot of future disappointment.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Geordie on September 12, 2017, 12:33:51 AM
Petit mal.

What disease exactly? She said it occurred to her it might be epilepsy but throughout the tears no seizures occurred to her and these were rare events
Psychosis, perhaps. Standard questions from an examining Psychiatrist usually include something like "Are you hearing or seeing anything that no one else is? Can you read people's thoughts? Are thoughts being placed in your head?"

I once told a psychiatrist about an aquaintance who talked of "god shots," ideas being put into his head by none other than the christian god. The doctor said "Thought injection - an indicator of psychosis."
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on September 20, 2017, 01:38:05 PM
Petit mal.

What disease exactly? She said it occurred to her it might be epilepsy but throughout the tears no seizures occurred to her and these were rare events
Psychosis, perhaps. Standard questions from an examining Psychiatrist usually include something like "Are you hearing or seeing anything that no one else is? Can you read people's thoughts? Are thoughts being placed in your head?"

I once told a psychiatrist about an aquaintance who talked of "god shots," ideas being put into his head by none other than the christian god. The doctor said "Thought injection - an indicator of psychosis."

Thanks. I have read pretty much since then about mystical experiences and not all of them are explained by diseases. Psychology is still looking into this as there are many healthy people experiencing unity with the divine.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on September 12, 2018, 06:42:25 PM
https://jamesbishopblog.com/2017/02/10/doctors-confirm-womans-miracle-healing-from-irreversible-blindness-after-attending-church/

If you have any comments on this please post.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: BDL on September 12, 2018, 07:38:51 PM
https://jamesbishopblog.com/2017/02/10/doctors-confirm-womans-miracle-healing-from-irreversible-blindness-after-attending-church/

If you have any comments on this please post.
Do they have the medical records that prove she was blind?
As far as I know, there is only the mere claim that God restored her eyesight.
The evidence, unfortunately, seems to be nonexistent.

I think this would become pretty widespread news and doctors, biologists, researchers, etc. would be testing her to find out what really happened. Especially since, if they did find out what caused this, it might be the cure for this “irreversible blindness”.

And why can this not be classified as chance?
After all, millions of people pray for something to happen or for something to be healed but it just never happens. So why now would God pick some random lady over the homeless, the sick, the dying, the lost, and the broken? Rationally, if it turns out she wasn’t lying about her blindness, then you can presume that it was up to chance.

There is nothing in the universe that is unexplainable with science. The Christian Apologetics site that this was posted on seems to disagree with medical science, and instead goes for a theological explanation. I don’t think an actual doctor is going to say “there is no medical explanation” as the article suggests happened.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on September 13, 2018, 01:31:31 AM
Watch on youtube "Dafne  Gutierrez healed through intercession St. Sharbel chruch" where the doctor following her say they can't explain.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: BDL on September 13, 2018, 07:45:50 AM
Watch on youtube "Dafne  Gutierrez healed through intercession St. Sharbel chruch" where the doctor following her say they can't explain.
I did, but there’s not much there.
Here’s some possible explanations:
1. She lied to the doctors about the symptoms and they just took her word for it. Intercranial Hypertension is diagnosed solely by symptoms (as far as I know) so there isn’t really any physical examination you can do.
2. Positive reaction to carbonic anhydrase inhibitors potentially caused by decrease in overall stress and proper dosing of medication
3. She didn’t lie to the doctors (technically) but she accidentally misinformed the doctors, or the doctors made a mistake and misdiagnosed her.

I don’t think there’s really enough investigation on this case, but it’s irrational for any medical professional to stop with the biological examinations and just pin this on magic.

Everything in the universe is explainable with science. Whether or not people can find that explanation.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: BDL on September 13, 2018, 08:04:11 AM
I need more information and scientists need to actually do some more testing.

I don’t accept magic as a plausible explanation for anything.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on September 13, 2018, 03:47:54 PM
Well, I wonder why it did not occur to the physicians who reviewed her medical records what you are saying. However, if anyone knows of books or materials that investigate thoroughly similar cases, especially those who have visions after which they are cured, I would be interested to read.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: BDL on September 13, 2018, 07:30:53 PM
Yes, I’m unsure why there aren’t more people investigating her claims.
I would guess that most of them don’t really care for it.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: jfb on January 10, 2019, 12:45:30 PM
https://jamesbishopblog.com/2017/02/10/doctors-confirm-womans-miracle-healing-from-irreversible-blindness-after-attending-church/

If you have any comments on this please post.

Sorry, late to this particular party.

First comment - The sourcing in this article is somewhat suspect.  I'm curious to know what institution(s) Dr. Borik is associated with, if any. 

Second comment - Dr. Borik's statement is that "pressure in the brain is so high that often times it strangulates the optic nerve".  Not always, but often.  It's possible that in this particular case, the pressure on the nerve was severe enough to affect vision, but not so severe as to cause permanent damage. 

Third comment - It's also possible that the actual cause of Gutierrez' blindness was misdiagnosed.  Doctors do make mistakes sometimes. 

If the contention is that Gutierrez' optic nerve spontaneously regenerated from dead or damaged tissue, then Dr. Borik should be writing up papers for the major medical journals, as that's something that just doesn't happen.  So I'm inclined to believe that this is a case where either the cause was misdiagnosed, or this was a rare case where the hypertension didn't result in permanent damage. 
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: bobdude11 on January 11, 2019, 01:01:32 PM
Yes Cat I said there is spontaneous remission, what I am discussing is the vision and operation reported by not only her but many other people. But I think it is not our, or my capability now to investigate it .. it will need close investigation..

-or- is it possible she never had it in the first place (misdiagnosed) and the physician, to protect him/her self, is simply using this as a 'miraculous no more cancer' diagnosis?
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Echnaton on January 11, 2019, 03:33:47 PM
One of Dunnings laws of investigating the paranormal is to see if the event actually happened.  A miracle reported reported on a theological blog from a far off country is a pretty good candidate for being skeptical that the event actually occurred. Add the predisposition of the woman to look to religious explanations for natural events, inferred from her shrine to the Virgin Mary, and there is even more reason to be skeptical. 

The miracle needs to be shown to be true before one speculates on a natural cause.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: jfb on January 17, 2019, 11:47:37 AM
A miracle reported reported on a theological blog from a far off country is a pretty good candidate for being skeptical that the event actually occurred.

I wouldn't characterize Arizona as a "far off country", at least not by geographical standards.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Allan F on January 18, 2019, 02:04:33 PM
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Echnaton on January 18, 2019, 04:37:34 PM
A miracle reported reported on a theological blog from a far off country is a pretty good candidate for being skeptical that the event actually occurred.



I wouldn't characterize Arizona as a "far off country", at least not by geographical standards.

The blog is from South Africa.  That is nearly antipodal to Arizona where the news report is from. And to me. It seems someone in South Africa would have no opportunity to do actual reporting on this for a blog.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: gillianren on January 19, 2019, 11:51:06 AM
Yeah, that had been my thought.  If it were someone from New Mexico--or even New Jersey!--reporting on it, that would be one thing.  But it's clearly someone with no opportunity to have first-hand knowledge of the case.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on May 30, 2019, 04:29:35 AM
http://www.maronite-institute.org/MARI/JMS/july00/Testimony_Of_Ratmond_Nader.htm

hi. any scientific explanations on how the marks were formed?

thnx
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Jason Thompson on May 30, 2019, 05:36:10 AM
http://www.maronite-institute.org/MARI/JMS/july00/Testimony_Of_Ratmond_Nader.htm

hi. any scientific explanations on how the marks were formed?

thnx

Many possible explanations exist. However, the testimony of one man without witnesses that it was a miracle counts for nothing whatsoever in the quest for explanations. If I was feeling cynical I could point out that he is more than capable of putting a handprint on his arm himself, by squeezing hard with his other hand, or even by passing out awkwardly with his hand under his arm for a few hours.

Once again, LionKing, I will remind you that an inability to provide a precise and verifiable scientific explanation does not make 'miracles' any more valid an explanation.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on May 30, 2019, 06:59:23 AM
http://www.maronite-institute.org/MARI/JMS/july00/Testimony_Of_Ratmond_Nader.htm

hi. any scientific explanations on how the marks were formed?

thnx

Many possible explanations exist. However, the testimony of one man without witnesses that it was a miracle counts for nothing whatsoever in the quest for explanations. If I was feeling cynical I could point out that he is more than capable of putting a handprint on his arm himself, by squeezing hard with his other hand, or even by passing out awkwardly with his hand under his arm for a few hours.

Once again, LionKing, I will remind you that an inability to provide a precise and verifiable scientific explanation does not make 'miracles' any more valid an explanation.

I listened to his Arabic narrative..he took off his shirt before .. so he was exposed.. but I am trying to find a perfect scientific explanation for similar stories ..

I don't think he is lying because his life changed completely . however, I think it is some hallucinatory case.. similar to those of stigmata and alien abductions..

but for instance, stigmata are connected to hysteria, alien abductions to sleep paralysis as I read.. could there be a "perfect" explanation for similar cases or a scientific name for this case? if you need to know more information, I can address if I heard from him.

edited to add: I am also searching for an explanation of the burn that would not hurt.. a physician saw it as they said and said it is a burn . To me, this is similar to aliens leaving implants, scars and burns, but how exactly can he not feel pain even after everything ended? does this have anything similar? There is involved also the Oz factor (not feeling time) that is similar to alien abductions, telepathy as well.. but alien abductions involve fear and bad sexual experiences .. this is different as it is euphoric..
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: Jason Thompson on May 30, 2019, 02:09:25 PM
I am trying to find a perfect scientific explanation for similar stories ..

You won't find a 'perfect' scientific explanation, because anything approaching that requires a lot of testing and work that simply is not possible. An unexplained mark on someone's arm and some anecdotes doesn't offer much to go on.

Quote
I don't think he is lying because his life changed completely

He wouldn't be the first who changed their life on the back of a lie. I'm not saying he is, but the subsequent life change can't be used as evidence he isn't either.

Quote
I am also searching for an explanation of the burn that would not hurt.

Who says it didn't hurt? The only person who can testify to that is the person who got the burn. There's no objective evidence it didn't hurt. He says after the event that it didn't. Again, no corroboration. However there are instances of people not feeling pain for various nervous or psychological reasons.

In short, you may not find a fully satisfactory scientific explanation, but that doesn't make miracles a valid one. Just as not being able to identify an object in the sky conlusively doesn't make it any more likely to be an alien spacecraft. I do, however, commend your efforts to find an explanation rather than swallowing it whole as a miracle.
Title: Re: Miracles vs. Science
Post by: LionKing on June 01, 2019, 05:05:36 AM
I was thinking to do a comparison between him and similar cases. For instance, I found from my readings that a person exhibiting stigmata was found to be hysteric. The weeping statues or pictures in his home were done by his family who were manipulating him. In another case, there was hemiplegia of hysteric origin misdiagnosed so when the person was healed due to suggestion it was considered a miracle in Lourdes. Also, in Asclepian temples, there was an interesting phenomena called dream healing where a dream is solicited and people see Asclepius healing them in dreams and wake up healed.
Combine these three cases and you can solve one case here that was said to have hemiplegia,had a dream where the saint healed her,woke up with scars and got healed. You can at least doubt strongly, although you did not examine her, that she had hysteric hemiplegia and those weeping statues or pictures in her home are done by her family who are manipulating her same as that man I mentioned above..the dream also was solicited by prayer, and by fasting and pain similar to what takes place in different cultures.. so it is very similar to cases studied and examined ..

I was hoping someone with similar experiences with patients who are similar to this man's case could offer a plausible diagnosis from an expert point of view . There are many things to be looked at. One of them is that he was kneeling and woke up kneeling..as if frozen..
Another thing he felt  very warm in the midst of the cold night. Are there some physiological changes that are scientifically observed under such circumstances of hallucination that can offer a plausible diagnosis?. Is there some disease or case that can connect all of what he says ? I hope if experts are here and want to comment they do.