• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:
and by the way, I got a bad news for you, as of now this thread is rated 4, later on it will be down to 1 or zero.. Why? Because I am about to debunk all of your silly arguments here. Now you only got 2 options, one is to put me on ignore, or deny reality and be delusional....

Sorry child, your atheist cult is about to perish, buh bye atheists philosophy........
Click to expand...

Begin the debunking muscleman... we wait with baited breath.
 
the more you get in the conversation, the quicker the proof is provided. The more you deny your own typing, change definitions, change topic, FALSELY acccuse me, REFUSING TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, the longer the proof is provided...

The cults have ignored the next topic which is concerning "supernatural", in which I promised that by then, the PROOF OF GOD WILL BE PROVIDED...

But you cults refuse to acknowledge this like a SISSY, then whine..

Again, I am waiting for the cult members response above concerning the word "natural"...
 
Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:


Ok, are you up for a challenge? And not like a sissy as many of the cult members here are who likes to ignore those they cant handle?
Click to expand...

I can't speak for UnrepentantSinner, but I'll take that bet.

I assert that while the Bible makes reference to many extant (at that time) cities and people, there is no archaeological evidence to support claims of "miraculous" events, or evidence that can only be explained by divine intervention.
 
Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

Joshua Korosi said:
I assert that while the Bible makes reference to many extant (at that time) cities and people, there is no archaeological evidence to support claims of "miraculous" events, or evidence that can only be explained by divine intervention.
Click to expand...
Hear, hear. MM thinks that SHOUTING is a substitute for reasoned argument. His solution to being asked questions is to RAISE HIS VOICE. My 3YO nephew does that...
 
Muscleman is still a participant in this forum? It seemed to me that as he just sorta faded away from the "Million dollar gimme gimme gimme" thread that he'd turned tail and ran.

Oh well, learn something new every day...
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

Kimpatsu said:

Hear, hear. MM thinks that SHOUTING is a substitute for reasoned argument. His solution to being asked questions is to RAISE HIS VOICE. My 3YO nephew does that...
Click to expand...

Another example of the brainwashed cult. Changing topic, saying im a troll, or this or that, BUT REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE TOPIC...

Yup, another brainwashed cult......
 
Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

Joshua Korosi said:


I can't speak for UnrepentantSinner, but I'll take that bet.

I assert that while the Bible makes reference to many extant (at that time) cities and people, there is no archaeological evidence to support claims of "miraculous" events, or evidence that can only be explained by divine intervention.
Click to expand...

OH thank you for acknowledging the topic, i hope your not like the rest of the cult members here.


You are wrong. The cape of Juan Diego (from Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico) still exist today... Over 500 yrs old, scientifically speaking, a cactus cloth dont last over 40 yrs, meanwhile this one is currently existing..

In addition to that, scientist have scanned it in the 70's (last time they were given permission by the church for investigation..) and it did date over 500 yrs, but there are no brush strokes, and no sketching behind it....
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:


OH thank you for acknowledging the topic, i hope your not like the rest of the cult members here.


You are wrong. The cape of Juan Diego (from Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico) still exist today... Over 500 yrs old, scientifically speaking, a cactus cloth dont last over 40 yrs, meanwhile this one is currently existing..

In addition to that, scientist have scanned it in the 70's (last time they were given permission by the church for investigation..) and it did date over 500 yrs, but there are no brush strokes, and no sketching behind it....
Click to expand...

Please update your information so you don't come off looking more stupid than "u r."
http://www.csicop.org/sb/2002-06/guadalupe.html

"In addition, new scholarship (e.g. Brading 2001) suggests that, while the image was painted not long after the Spanish conquest and was alleged to have miraculous powers, the pious legend of Mary's appearance to Juan Diego may date from the following century. Some Catholic scholars, including the former curator of the basilica Monsignor Guillermo Schulemburg, even doubt the historical existence of Juan Diego. Schulemburg said the canonization of Juan Diego would be the "recognition of a cult" (Nickell 1997)."

Notice where it says "2001?" Try keeping up to date.

Now Douche Doggy Dogg, I guess I can amuse myself for a short time.

Natural

my definition - that which is within the perameters of known scientific laws and theories.
dictionary - http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=natural

So, let's have story time and see if you can follow along.

A book has in it that after a godman resurrected himself zombies walked the streets of a far off city called Jerusalem. They sat around and had bread and tea with the people who were alive and then, though the book doesn't tell us this, they went back to their graves. Many many years later someone finds a box that they keep the bones of the dead in. This type of box is called an "ossuary." Can you say "ossuary?" Supposedly this box contained the bones of the godman who caused the zombies to walk around Jerusalem. Some say it's a fake. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. But can you tell me, if you think really hard about it, if the fact that the box is real, does that mean that the zombies actually walked the streets?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

Originally posted by muscleman
You are wrong. The cape of Juan Diego (from Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico) still exist today... Over 500 yrs old, scientifically speaking, a cactus cloth dont last over 40 yrs, meanwhile this one is currently existing..
Click to expand...
If a garment that was supposed to disintegrate after 40 years still exists after 500, there must be added factors causing the longevity. These are natural factors; such longevity does not a priori demonstrate divine intervention.
Originally posted by muscleman
In addition to that, scientist have scanned it in the 70's (last time they were given permission by the church for investigation..) and it did date over 500 yrs, but there are no brush strokes, and no sketching behind it....
Click to expand...
I seem to remember a similar issue involving the Turin Shroud. There was even a US Air Force analysis in the 1970s that claimed it was genuine (in the sense that it dated from Palestine of 2,000 years ago), but improved analytical techniques have since debunked the Shroud as a fake. Let's test your cape with 21st century technology, and see how it stands up.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

UnrepentantSinner said:


Please update your information so you don't come off looking more stupid than "u r."
http://www.csicop.org/sb/2002-06/guadalupe.html

"In addition, new scholarship (e.g. Brading 2001) suggests that, while the image was painted not long after the Spanish conquest and was alleged to have miraculous powers, the pious legend of Mary's appearance to Juan Diego may date from the following century. Some Catholic scholars, including the former curator of the basilica Monsignor Guillermo Schulemburg, even doubt the historical existence of Juan Diego. Schulemburg said the canonization of Juan Diego would be the "recognition of a cult" (Nickell 1997)."

Notice where it says "2001?" Try keeping up to date.

Now Douche Doggy Dogg, I guess I can amuse myself for a short time.

Natural

my definition - that which is within the perameters of known scientific laws and theories.
dictionary - http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=natural

So, let's have story time and see if you can follow along.

A book has in it that after a godman resurrected himself zombies walked the streets of a far off city called Jerusalem. They sat around and had bread and tea with the people who were alive and then, though the book doesn't tell us this, they went back to their graves. Many many years later someone finds a box that they keep the bones of the dead in. This type of box is called an "ossuary." Can you say "ossuary?" Supposedly this box contained the bones of the godman who caused the zombies to walk around Jerusalem. Some say it's a fake. Maybe it is, maybe it's not. But can you tell me, if you think really hard about it, if the fact that the box is real, does that mean that the zombies actually walked the streets?
Click to expand...

Poor brainwashed children... You have to do better than quoting WORDS ABOUT "GOD" FROM AN ATHEIST ...

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0813122104/csicop/104-7569021-1878331

CLICK ON IT..

I clicked on the "validity" of the author, the guy is one of your own kind. Hmm, his opinion CANNOT CHANGE THE FACT, THE FACT THAT WHEN IT WAS X-RAY and SCANNED by a group of scientist in the 70's, there are NO sketches behind the paint, AND NO BRUSH STROKES, even discovery channel have investigated this fact...

Now about the shroud of Turin, that one failed the recognition of the church, it is openly recognized as part fraud, science have revealed that........

( the church as in "magisterium", pope united with the bishops, not just a priest or some catholic guy..)
 
and about zombies walking on the streets. That reminds me of the ENTIRE HISTORY... The only difference is the famous word "supernatural" which you guys NEVER deal and always avoid....
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:


You are wrong. The cape of Juan Diego (from Lady of Guadalupe in Mexico) still exist today... Over 500 yrs old, scientifically speaking, a cactus cloth dont last over 40 yrs, meanwhile this one is currently existing..

In addition to that, scientist have scanned it in the 70's (last time they were given permission by the church for investigation..) and it did date over 500 yrs, but there are no brush strokes, and no sketching behind it....
Click to expand...

The Tilma of Juan Diego is admittedly fascinating. The legend goes that in 1531, Juan Diego (an Aztec convert) was visited by the Virgin Mary, and given the tilma on which her image appeared in full color in order to convince a skeptical bishop. Remarkably, the Blessed Virgin seems to have "imposed" her image on the tilma in the exact same artistic style common amongst Spanish painters in the 16th century.

Allegedly, no paints or pigments were found to have been used (except for some gold leaf - but that was added to the tilma later, we're told), and the material, made of strands of cactus fiber, has lasted more than 500 years.

In 1982, Jose Rosales, an art restoration expert, examined the cloth (without formal permission) and obtained closeup and infrared images of it, as well as chemical analysis. His findings indicated that the painting is most likely a poorly rendered copy of a better original. There are several oddities that would suggest a non-divine origin, such as typical mistakes - the fact that the part in Mary's hair is off-center, for example, or that her irises are outlined - something which painters do a lot, even though real irises aren't so outlined. In addition, closeups show obvious peeling and chipping of the paint along the seam that runs vertically down the center of the tilma. Notice all these imperfections (uneven hair, hilighted irises, peeling paint) in this image:

fig4.jpg


You'll also notice that, despite claims of no "paint" being used, highlights on Mary's cheeks and forehead show paint applied thickly enough to subdue the texture of the cloth there.

Rosales determined that the cactus cloth, which normally would've deteriorated in about 20 years, was kept from doing so because the entire cloth was coated in white primer (specifically, calcium sulfate), and normal 16th century painting techniques were used to compose this piece.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

Joshua Korosi said:


The Tilma of Juan Diego is admittedly fascinating. The legend goes that in 1531, Juan Diego (an Aztec convert) was visited by the Virgin Mary, and given the tilma on which her image appeared in full color in order to convince a skeptical bishop. Remarkably, the Blessed Virgin seems to have "imposed" her image on the tilma in the exact same artistic style common amongst Spanish painters in the 16th century.

Allegedly, no paints or pigments were found to have been used (except for some gold leaf - but that was added to the tilma later, we're told), and the material, made of strands of cactus fiber, has lasted more than 500 years.

In 1982, Jose Rosales, an art restoration expert, examined the cloth (without formal permission) and obtained closeup and infrared images of it, as well as chemical analysis. His findings indicated that the painting is most likely a poorly rendered copy of a better original. There are several oddities that would suggest a non-divine origin, such as typical mistakes - the fact that the part in Mary's hair is off-center, for example, or that her irises are outlined - something which painters do a lot, even though real irises aren't so outlined. In addition, closeups show obvious peeling and chipping of the paint along the seam that runs vertically down the center of the tilma. Notice all these imperfections (uneven hair, hilighted irises, peeling paint) in this image:

fig4.jpg


You'll also notice that, despite claims of no "paint" being used, highlights on Mary's cheeks and forehead show paint applied thickly enough to subdue the texture of the cloth there.

Rosales determined that the cactus cloth, which normally would've deteriorated in about 20 years, was kept from doing so because the entire cloth was coated in white primer (specifically, calcium sulfate) and normal 16th century painting techniques were used.
Click to expand...


hahahahahahahahha

hahahahhahahahha
'
hahahahahahhaha, laughing continued...

WHAT WAS SHE THINKING? SHE ACTUALLY THINKS SHE CAN EASILY INVESTIGATE THE REAL ONE WITHOUT THE CHURCH PERMISSION?

EVEN BILL GATES COULD NOT AFFORD WHAT THE CHURCH DECIDES TO DO...

NOONE...AND I MEAN, NOONE IS ALLOWED TO INVESTIGATE THE REAL ONE UNLESS PERMISSION IS GIVEN...

AND BY THE WAY, WHO IS THIS ROSALES GIRL?

ANOTHER OF YOUR BRAINWASHED BUDDY BEFORE ( I CAN LOOK UP HIS NAME IF U WISH) SAID THAT THE VERY RIGHT HAND OF THE POPE (THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS OF THE CHURCH) DOESNT KNOW WHEN LIFE BEGINS, IS IT AT CONCEPTION?

STUPID, EVEN KIDS KNOW THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, HECK, EVEN MUSLIMS KNOW THAT.....

IS THERE ANY GOOD VALIDITY TO HER CLAIM? WHO IS SHE?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:


So what is above the scientific laws are supernatural right? :)
Click to expand...

I'm confused, were you trying to prove something?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

neutrino_cannon said:


I'm confused, were you trying to prove something?
Click to expand...

I clicked on your profile to see yur age (I guessed about 18) but I hope yur mature... Do you have any debating skills? If so, why are u avoiding a conversation LIKE A SISSY?

Im simply trying to clarify YOUR OWN TYPING.

Again, what is natural as u defined it (SEE YUR TYPING ABOVE) is when it is beyond scientific laws, correct? Answer yes or no.......
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bad Apologetics

muscleman said:



hahahahahahahahha

hahahahhahahahha
'
hahahahahahhaha, laughing continued...

WHAT WAS SHE THINKING? SHE ACTUALLY THINKS SHE CAN EASILY INVESTIGATE THE REAL ONE WITHOUT THE CHURCH PERMISSION?

EVEN BILL GATES COULD NOT AFFORD WHAT THE CHURCH DECIDES TO DO...

NOONE...AND I MEAN, NOONE IS ALLOWED TO INVESTIGATE THE REAL ONE UNLESS PERMISSION IS GIVEN...

AND BY THE WAY, WHO IS THIS ROSALES GIRL?

ANOTHER OF YOUR BRAINWASHED BUDDY BEFORE ( I CAN LOOK UP HIS NAME IF U WISH) SAID THAT THE VERY RIGHT HAND OF THE POPE (THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS OF THE CHURCH) DOESNT KNOW WHEN LIFE BEGINS, IS IT AT CONCEPTION?

STUPID, EVEN KIDS KNOW THAT LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION, HECK, EVEN MUSLIMS KNOW THAT.....

IS THERE ANY GOOD VALIDITY TO HER CLAIM? WHO IS SHE?
Click to expand...

Please calm down.

Jose Rosales (a he, not a she) is an art restoration expert hired by the magazine Proceso (a Spanish-speaking magazine) to perform the analysis. His findings were published by the magazine last year. He did not obtain the tilma from a church source, but rather examined it in situ ("where it is", in the shrine) without the permission of the priests. While this limited the scope of his investigation, he was able to obtain data nevertheless.

Even if you refuse to accept Rosales' findings, the photo I've presented was not part of Rosales' investigation, but was taken by a different visitor. In it, you can still see the imperfections in the artwork, like the cracking paint even though "no paint was used". If the painting had been divinely produced, I would expect a higher level of skill.

I'm not aware of this "cult" you refer to, or how you've come to arbitrarily include me as a member.

The Tilma is a fraud, and not a very good one either, I'm sorry to say.
 
Hey Josh, I am very skeptical that this guy CAN investigate it himself (considering that there are solid alarms, cameras everywhere, HIGH SECURITY OTHER THAN HIMSELF "LIKE THE ST. PETERS SQUARE..."). I am skeptical that this guy will, AND SPEAK PUBLICLY AGAINST HIS OWN WORK..

But regardless if its true or not... We are not talking about "Cracks of the paint"..

The miracle comes in the picture when the cloth last so long; about/over 500 yrs...(when over 100 yrs of its existence, no chemicals were discovered capable of restoring it, only lately...).

And that when scanned, no SKETCHES WERE FOUND.. AND NO "BRUSH- STROKES"...THATS THE SCIENTIFIC FINDING.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom