I
Ion
Guest
I really don’t know…
A fish gets rotten starting with the head.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A fish gets rotten starting with the head.
T
ThinkingSapien
Guest
That’s fine. It happens.I am very sorry if this is a frequently recurring thread. I do appreciate links to past discussions, though.
I don’t think it was called a hoax. But after asking questions on what happened the event description is pretty ambiguous. I don’t want to rehash that entire thing but skim through the other thread if you want to see what I mean.Question: Was the technology available in 1917 to pull off a hoax of this caliber?
L
Love4All
Guest
You don’t know who you meant by “they?”I really don’t know…
A fish gets rotten starting with the head.
I
Ion
Guest
By “they” I meant all of them. How was this to work in practice, I don’t know.You don’t know who you meant by “they?”
J
john330
Guest
If it was only a vision, why would the ground and clothing be dried? If it was not a vision and the sun was actually dancing around, then people in other places in the world would have noticed.
I think you may be misinterpreting my position. I am a catholic, but I also have a philosophy degree. I enjoy trying to explain the unexplained just like atheist philosophers. A couple of years of studying epistemology will do that to you. I have seen miracles explained many times in very simple, natural ways. This does not affect my faith in Jesus Christ. I would like to determine if there is a GOOD explanation for this event. There may be information out there that I am not aware of. We all know that if there is a God, He can do whatever He wants when it comes to suspending natures laws, otherwise known as causing a miracle. Even if it is a paradox on the surface. Even a hardened atheist can accept that syllogism. What I would like to know, from an academic standpoint, is whether or not there is an explanation for this event that satisfies all the criteria for what was observed that day. The “machine hypothesis” is one attempt at that.How do you move the sun only for people in a local area?
“The sun moved while it stood still” is indeed a paradox. But what I am saying is that something resembling the sun moved that day, and the result has been refered to as " The Miracle of the Sun". The actual sun did not move. And yet something happened out there that is unexplainable, IMO, as of yet. The scientist in me wants to explain the unexplained. Thus has been the nature of science for thousands of years. If there is not a good answer for how what seemed to be the sun moved, spun in the sky, produced many colors, dried mud and wet clothing, and was visible for miles, then “the Miracle of the Sun” is yet to be debunked. And yes, as it took place on a day when a miracle was predicted in a religious setting, people will continue to refer to it as a miracle. This does not mean it is a miracle, from an epistemic standpoint.
Now, can it be debunked or not? Can any explanation satisfy all the criteria?
I
Ion
Guest
As I remember reading about this miracle, atheists of those days “were sure” it was a phenomena of mass illusion. Recently I have challenged a protestant for an explanation, and he told me that the “extraterestrials” can very well trick us and perform the miracle.(???). Also, there many guys in India doing such things to trick the peoples.(???)I think you may be misinterpreting my position. I am a catholic, but I also have a philosophy degree. I enjoy trying to explain the unexplained just like atheist philosophers.
…
Now, can it be debunked or not? Can any explanation satisfy all the criteria?
Wishfull thinking can step in and make one believe something to fit the wish. Then another will use it as an example. And so on.
When Jesus ordered the sea and wind to calm down, it was so. There is no science in miracles. Sometime you can immitate the result of a miracle but thats all.
I
inocente
Guest
I think you’re straining the credibility of evidence there - as I understand it that’s what the girl who claimed Mary spoke to her wrote 24 years later.Actually, the purpose of the Fatima revelation was stated explicitly by Our Blessed Mother: “God wishes to establish in the world devotion to My Immaculate Heart.” Since that devotion now exists in the world, it seems God made the right choices.
There were 37 million casualties of WWI and then another 60 million of WWII. God (or Mary) could have softened hearts, stopped the mechanized slaughter, and established far, far more devotion in the world by placing the miracle over the battlefield at Ypres.
By that one small change of location God could have stopped war for ever and made all of us devoted Catholics. Those who believe in the miracle need to explain why an all-loving God didn’t do that obvious thing, and instead gave every appearance of turning His back by putting on a polite little light show in the middle of nowhere.
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
Physicist Stanley Jaki, who has studied the witness reports, thinks that it was a meterological rather than an astronomical phenomenon, and if I remember correctly, with the perceived movement and color changes involving ice particles in the surrounding clouds. If the miracle was meterological in nature, this would also explain why people could stare at the sun.How do you move the sun only for people in a local area?
J
jonathan_hili
Guest
An interesting response, Inocente. I guess, one could equally accuse God for feeding the five thousand through His Son while letting millions of others starve throughout the world?Yes. It supposedly took place on 13 October 1917, in what was then a sleepy backwater in Portugal.
Meanwhile thousands were dying not far away on the battlefields of the First World War (the first battle of Passchendaele was the day before).
God could have stopped the slaughter by creating the miracle over the battlefield where all the soldiers would have seen it. Instead we’re supposed to believe He callously chose a spot were His pretty little light show had no chance of interrupting the slaughter.
We’re asked to believe God was more interested in making Fátima a tourist spot than helping those in the trenches, which is demeaning both to their memory and to God.
I think it’s rather presumptuous to try to fully understand the motives of God.
Furthermore, we need to bear in mind a couple of points:
(i) the ostensible intention of the miracle was not to stop the war but to validate the authenticity of the claims made by the children - and if what they said was taken seriously, the war would have stopped; and
(ii) those involved in the First World War by and large chose to fight (I don’t really mean the conscripts here, but the governments). God respects our free will even when we invariably due stupid and inhumane things.
J
jonathan_hili
Guest
But even if we accept that, isn’t it kind of miraculous that the children knew when this meteorological event was going to happen? Also, the reports of what was seen are varied - with some seeing nothing at all - so if this was a natural phenomenon, wouldn’t we expect universal, or at least 99%, consistency?Physicist Stanley Jaki, who has studied the witness reports, thinks that it was a meterological rather than an astronomical phenomenon, and if I remember correctly, with the perceived movement and color changes involving ice particles in the surrounding clouds. If the miracle was meterological in nature, this would also explain why people could stare at the sun.
A
Al_Moritz
Guest
Yes, Jaki thinks that the phenomenon was natural, but that the accurate prediction was what makes it a miracle.But even if we accept that, isn’t it kind of miraculous that the children knew when this meteorological event was going to happen? Also, the reports of what was seen are varied - with some seeing nothing at all - so if this was a natural phenomenon, wouldn’t we expect universal, or at least 99%, consistency?
As for consistency, you can never expect 99% consistency among witness accounts – even in a regular criminal case, for example. That is simply the nature of human observation. Yet with this in mind, Jaki found the consistency remarkable among the people questioned. And having read his book with the witness accounts contained therein, I would have to agree.
J
jonathan_hili
Guest
That could well be.Yes, Jaki thinks that the phenomenon was natural, but that the accurate prediction was what makes it a miracle.
As for consistency, you can never expect 99% consistency among witness accounts – even in a regular criminal case, for example. That is simply the nature of human observation. Yet with this in mind, Jaki found the consistency remarkable among the people questioned. And having read his book with the witness accounts contained therein, I would have to agree.
What doesn’t convince me about the strict natural phenomenon explanation is that some viewers witnessed seeing nothing out of the ordinary, which to me is remarkable. I mean, if witnesses are at the scene of a car accident, they may describe different things but none would claim there was no car accident, especially if it was a 10-car pile-up.
J
john330
Guest
That is remarkable. I would like to read their accounts. However, the reports say the ground was dried by the event. If these witnesses are correct, then the ground and clothing must not have dried at all.That could well be.
What doesn’t convince me about the strict natural phenomenon explanation is that some viewers witnessed seeing nothing out of the ordinary, which to me is remarkable. I mean, if witnesses are at the scene of a car accident, they may describe different things but none would claim there was no car accident, especially if it was a 10-car pile-up.
A
aux1
Guest
Assumimg that people in Fatima indeed came in contact with some entity, which was also responsible for the Miracle of the Sun… How do you know that this entity was indeed who it claimed to be? Why not an alien performing a sociological experiment?Can anyone adequately debunk the Miracle of the Sun?
Will sit back and listen to both sides. I would like to believe it, but what if it is one of the most elaborate hoaxes in history? I ask this in the philosophy forum because it doesn’t fit anywhere else and I believe there are many scientific minds here who may like to opine.
C
ccmnxc
Guest
While I guess it is possible, it seems rather ad hoc and lacks independent evidence. Theism, and Christianity, meanwhile, do have evidence aside from Fatima, so it seems more plausible to believe. I don’t think anyone could possibly falsify your hypothesis, but it seems to lack evidence to support it.Assumimg that people in Fatima indeed came in contact with some entity, which was also responsible for the Miracle of the Sun… How do you know that this entity was indeed who it claimed to be? Why not an alien performing a sociological experiment?
C
cornbread_r2
Guest
IIRC, the children were allegedly told that a great sign would occur, but not what or when it would occur. Also, I can think of one meteorological event that depends greatly upon where one is positioned relative to the Sun and atmospheric factors to be observed – rainbows.But even if we accept that, isn’t it kind of miraculous that the children knew when this meteorological event was going to happen? Also, the reports of what was seen are varied - with some seeing nothing at all - so if this was a natural phenomenon, wouldn’t we expect universal, or at least 99%, consistency?
I wonder how the miracle at Fatima would fare with Vatican investigators these days when you consider that tens of thousands or more people have reported visions and such at Medjugorje, but those alleged events have thus far not been approved.
J
jonathan_hili
Guest
That could very well be. But prima facie wouldn’t you give the benefit of the doubt to the purported account? I mean, it could theoretically have been a Hollywood film producer with futuristic special effects. Or it could be someone coming from the future trying to fool everybody.Assumimg that people in Fatima indeed came in contact with some entity, which was also responsible for the Miracle of the Sun… How do you know that this entity was indeed who it claimed to be? Why not an alien performing a sociological experiment?
J
jonathan_hili
Guest
From the accounts I’ve read, the children were told the sign would occur on 13th October, when it did, though I don’t think the specific time was stated.IIRC, the children were allegedly told that a great sign would occur, but not what or when it would occur. Also, I can think of one meteorological event that depends greatly upon where one is positioned relative to the Sun and atmospheric factors to be observed – rainbows.
I wonder how the miracle at Fatima would fare with Vatican investigators these days when you consider that tens of thousands or more people have reported visions and such at Medjugorje, but those alleged events have thus far not been approved.
Sure, I agree about rainbows, but evidently what was described was nothing a localised refraction of light but something far more extensive. Again, it seems remarkable to me that some witnesses claimed that the sun “moved” (or appeared to do so), the children claimed to see visions of Christ, and others claimed to see nothing unusual.
I mean, has anyone actually experienced any other natural phenomena like this before? It just seems all too coincidental and unusual for it to be a freak of nature.
L
Love4All
Guest
Be more specific. “They” who?By “they” I meant all of them. How was this to work in practice, I don’t know.
Q
QueenofPeace23
Guest
Well there are pictures and newspaper articles from the Portugal newspaper available during the event. People who were all soaked from the rain were miraculously dry as was the mud. So what “mass hysteria” would cause this? Mass hysteria for thousands at once. I think you are the one who is trying to force some hysterical belief.I don’t think anyone thinks that technology was used, I think the more common skeptical explanation is a sort of “people saw what they wanted to see” plus looking into the sun can cause you to see weird things. You’d be amazed at what people will think they saw if prompted by the right stimuli.
I’d chalk it up to about the same as mass UFO sightings, of which there are a surprising amount.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.