Hmmm ... 67 verified healings out of how many hundreds of thousands who have visited Lourdes since 1858?

67 with extensive documentation and certification by two different medical boards, which have atheists on them.

So ... 67 out of how many hundreds of thousands who have visited Lourdes since 1858?

Seems like less than the God ratio of 2.5%.

If somehow you or your mother developed rheumatic heart disease (it usually occurs in children five to 15 years old), would you go to Lourdes to be healed?

Do you think that every single person who goes is going to have all of the documentation necessary?

Originally posted by spl_cadet

Well, why don't you try this quick and easy process for finding out information that you don't know: Googling. Try using such terms as lourdes miracle verification process

I did. I found this interesting article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/inter...315591,00.html

From the article:

It's not that Theillier hears such stories every day. But perhaps once a week, 50 times a year, somebody claims to have been cured at Lourdes. The cure might be anything from relief from a minor ailment to the full-blown, biblical, get up from your bed and walk. The bureau's archives, which go back 120 years, record between 6,000 and 7,000 such events. Of those, 66 have been recognised by the Catholic church as miracles

Ok. Time to do the math. There are 6,000 to 7,000 claimed miracles. Now we know that it is 67, not 66, that have been "confirmed". Lets start with the smaller number...

That means that of 6,000 claimed 1.1% are "true". Here comes the kicker. That number of 6,000 is only of those who filed claims for healing, not the total number of visitors. That means if we were to total in how many people attempted to get healed, the number drops significantly lower.

God seems to be horribly inefficient for an omnipotent being.

He also seems to play favorites. If God wants to give us signs of his existence, why not heal all 7,000 instead of a select few favorites? Why does He send the other 98.9% of people home just as bad off as they were to start with?

Just my take on this anyway....

Originally posted by Alchemist

I did. I found this interesting article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/inter...315591,00.html

From the article:



Ok. Time to do the math. There are 6,000 to 7,000 claimed miracles. Now we know that it is 67, not 66, that have been "confirmed". Lets start with the smaller number...

That means that of 6,000 claimed 1.1% are "true". Here comes the kicker. That number of 6,000 is only of those who filed claims for healing, not the total number of visitors. That means if we were to total in how many people attempted to get healed, the number drops significantly lower.

God seems to be horribly inefficient for an omnipotent being.

He also seems to play favorites. If God wants to give us signs of his existence, why not heal all 7,000 instead of a select few favorites? Why does He send the other 98.9% of people home just as bad off as they were to start with?

Just my take on this anyway....

None of this fluff actually deals with whether this was a miracle or not. Statistics don't prove jack.

To illustrate my point:

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape.
Skeptic: Oh yeah? Well there are 400 million pigs in the US alone who don't fly
Pig worshipper: !

Originally posted by spl_cadet

Is spontaneous remission consistent with the following description?



FWIW, my mom who is an RN has never heard of spontaneous remission of rheumatic heart disease and had this to day:

I am sure that she has not. This assumes that this womans case was correctly diagnosed in the first place. I have no way of knowing that, given it was 50 years ago.

Is the case of Andrew Stimpson a miracle or a case of Remission of an incurable disease or a simple false positive in the original test?

Any of those 67 documented cures amputees?

I am sure that she has not. This assumes that this womans case was correctly diagnosed in the first place. I have no way of knowing that, given it was 50 years ago.

Do you presume that both of the medical bureaus which investigated this are incompetent to the point of not being able to determine if the original diagnosis was correct?

Originally posted by Darth Executor

None of this fluff actually deals with whether this was a miracle or not. Statistics don't prove jack.

To illustrate my point:

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape.
Skeptic: Oh yeah? Well there are 400 million pigs in the US alone who don't fly
Pig worshipper: !

No, more like this:

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape. (There were these scientists who also said it was true).
Skeptic: Well there are 4000 video tapes of flying pigs made every year in the US, every single one so far either a proven fake or inconclusive.
Pig worshipper: !

Seriously, if you believe the paltry amount of evidence that certifies this miracle, you'll probably be equally impressed by these guys... http://www.certifiedpsychics.com/

Originally posted by spl_cadet

Do you presume that both of the medical bureaus which investigated this are incompetent to the point of not being able to determine if the original diagnosis was correct?

I have no idea, Given that it was 50 years ago. What tests were performed? Do you know?


Andrew Stimpson however is a truly anomolous case. Have you even looked him up yet?

Originally posted by Rationalist

No, more like this:

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape. (There were these scientists who also said it was true).
Skeptic: Well there are 4000 video tapes of flying pigs made every year in the US, every single one so far either a proven fake or inconclusive.
Pig worshipper: !

Really? There are so many miracle claims that one cannot help but trip over them as they try to get to the bathroom to brush their teeth in the morning? And how do you manage to create a grand conspiracy that involves many scientists? Maybe AiG and the like are right and there is an atheist conspiracy going around...

Originally posted by Darth Executor

Really? There are so many miracle claims that one cannot help but trip over them as they try to get to the bathroom to brush their teeth in the morning? And how do you manage to create a grand conspiracy that involves many scientists? Maybe AiG and the like are right and there is an atheist conspiracy going around...

Ahh.. when you say "scientists", are you must be talking about these guys these guys.

• Edited by a Moderator •

Originally posted by Rationalist

Ahh.. when you say "scientists", are you must be talking about these guys these guys.

In any case your claim is that if I were to say I was miraculously cured at that the cure was certified by anonymous "scientists", that would mean either my cure really was miraculous or all scientists were engaged in a grand dark conspiracy to cover up real miracles.

My vote would be for choice #3.. your just lying about the "scientists".

Yes, I'm sure the Vatican is stupid enough to make claims of miracles while secretly hiring Joe Banana off the street to lie about it in a report. According to this:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/ZLURDCUR.HTM

This second level of enquiry has existed since 1947. At first it was the Lourdes National Medical Committee; in 1954 it took on the "International" name.

The committee comprises 30 specialists, surgeons and professors or heads of department, from various countries, who meet once a year. The current president is professor Jean-Louis Armand-Laroche.

It allows an assessment to continue over several years in order to observe the development of the patient.

If the International Medical Committee gives a favorable opinion, the file is then sent to the competent Church authorities.

A quick Google search revealed that Armand-Laroche is a member of WFMH .

And winner of the French Legion of Honor


Of course, I'd much rather believe your conspiracy theory about the Pope paying a hobo 20 bucks to write up a professional report.

As a side note, accusations of lying need to be substantiated according to forum rules. I already know you did 0 research so say hi to the mods for me.

So, if I've read through the responses correctly, there are two main objections:
1. We can't trust the competency of the doctors who found no medical explanation for this.
2. God doesn't do enough miracles, therefore this isn't a miracle.

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape. (There were these scientists who also said it was true).
Skeptic: Well there are 4000 video tapes of flying pigs made every year in the US, every single one so far either a proven fake or inconclusive.
Pig worshipper: !

Pig worshipper: I saw a pig fly yesterday, here's a video tape. (There were these scientists who also said it was true).
Skeptic: Well there are 4000 video tapes of flying pigs made every year in the US, every single one so far either a proven fake or inconclusive.
Pig worshipper: The scientists who examined the tape are all experts in the relevant fields and agree that this is an authentic video.
Skeptic: • Edited by a Moderator •

Moderated By: One Bad Pig

Vulgar language is not allowed. ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.*** Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publically complain or whine, please take it to the Psychotherapy Room unless told otherwise.

Originally posted by Soundsurfr

Any of those 67 documented cures amputees?

None?

Is it relevant to this case? No.