The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

scientifically inexplicable things occur that are apparently supernatural, but not to atheists

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/20/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 729 times Debate No: 32712
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




scientifically inexplicable, apparently supernatural things occur, but not to atheists. these are apparent miracles.

please show something that happened to an atheist, that would have been called an apparent miracle had it happened to a religous person, because of its scientifically inexplicable nature.
no semantics pleas

what are thought of as miraculous events are heavily documented and readily available. there are tons of examples for theists, in previous debates i shown them. most credible people dont dispute hat things appear to be miracles, just that they claim there's alterative explanations. im not going to do a bunch of work to find them when it's readily available. . someone can see with no retinas even though this seems scientifically impossible etc, just to use an example. here are some documented miacles, and things that are inexplicable.

here is a list of incurable illnesses that have been cured, and medically documented...

lourdes is a religious place where many healings are said to occur. they have an organization set up to examine them (similar to the congregation for saints that the catholic church uses, but said to be even more rigorous)

here is a list of incurable diseases, that were cured

their criteria...
For a cure to be recognised as medically inexplicable, certain facts require to be established:
The original diagnosis must be verified and confirmed beyond doubt
The diagnosis must be regarded as "incurable" with current means (although ongoing treatments do not disqualify the cure)
The cure must happen in association with a visit to Lourdes, typically while in Lourdes or in the vicinity of the shrine itself (although drinking or bathing in the water are not required)
The cure must be immediate (rapid resolution of symptoms and signs of the illness)
The cure must be complete (with no residual impairment or deficit)
The cure must be permanent (with no recurrence)

The steps to verify the claims...
Approximately 35 claims per year are brought to the attention of the Lourdes Medical Bureau. Most of these are dismissed quickly. Three to five each year are investigated more thoroughly, by drawing up a Medical Bureau, comprising any doctors who were present in Lourdes at the time the apparent cure took place (this is the rationale for all members to notify the bureau of their visits to Lourdes).
The Medical Bureau investigates the claim, by examining the patient, the casenotes, and any test results (which can include biopsies, X-rays, CT scans, blood test results, and so on).
If this conference decides that further investigation is warranted, the case is referred to the International Lourdes Medical Committee (abbreviated in French to CMIL), which is an international panel of about twenty experts in various medical disciplines and of different religious beliefs. CMIL meets annually. A full investigation requires that one of its members investigates every detail of the case in question, and immerses him/herself in the literature around that condition to ensure that up-to-date academic knowledge is applied to the decision. This investigator may also consult with other colleagues about the case.
This information is presented at a CMIL meeting. Also present at the meeting are the head of the Lourdes Medical Bureau and the Bishop of Tarbes and Lourdes (currently this is Nicolas Brouwet). The cured subject is not normally present.

medically documented of incurable illessness..... what more would you require of me? that is a sincere question, not rhetorical
i will keep looking for studies and such, and may redebate you. if i deem it necesssay, if you do too good of a job as devil's advocate.
at a certain point, it is more the profound skeptisicms of the person, who needs to see it with their own eyes. than it is the lack of documentation etc.

the common objection of atheists and skeptics is that things just happen to occur by probability, that a genetic deviance, or random chance etc has caused it to happen to them. (that's how evolusion occurs, someone with a genetic deviance getting their genes prominent in the population)

but I don't see these things happening to atheists.
I see plenty of evidence from chrisitans and to a lesser extent other religious folks. but I don't see it from atheists etc, why is that? they might claim that it's just not as newsworthy or interpreted that way given the lack of religious context etc.
but you'd think there's at least be noteworthy evidence, or something, at least, that shows it happens to atheists etc

also, even if i acknowledged that they may occur, it would be extremely very small percentage wise.
as of now i'd be happy with just couple or a few examples.

ive shown some examples happening to theists, it shouldnt be hard to find some happening to atheists.




placebo |pləG2;sēb!3;|
noun ( pl. placebos )
a harmless pill, medicine, or procedure prescribed more for the psychological benefit to the patient than for any physiological effect: his Aunt Beatrice had been kept alive on sympathy and placebos for thirty years | [ as modifier ] : placebo drugs.
" a substance that has no therapeutic effect, used as a control in testing new drugs.
" a measure designed merely to calm or please someone.
ORIGIN late 18th cent.: from Latin, literally "I shall please," from placere "to please."

This Is why atheists don't like religious people.

They claim that good stuff happens to people who are religious and bad things happen to secular people.

You have sent me websites that only have religious proof and your wiki links are fake.

I am going to tell you about that person that was curred of HIV.

When they were a baby they had HIV. So the doctor gave them an extreme amount of Drugs. That killed the virus. NO godly presence was there.

You said that the bureau has religious officials on it. They are not classified to make any claim about miraculous happenings what so ever.

MY point is that religious miracles don't exist. Just because science can't explain some thing doesn't make it a miracle from god. You can infact not prove god. So you can not make any correct claim about miracles.

Atheist believe in science so they do not chose to recognize any form of a miracle.
Debate Round No. 1


most cures are not mental related, but hard core physical healing. we may not be able to explain most of it, but placebo accounts for only a fractions of healings.

the wiki links ae not fake. you can google the information provided in them to verify what they say, that the councl etc exists.
the AIDS example is obviously a scienctific cure. there's question, and more importantly there's nothing inexpicable.

the council has people of all faiths and walks of life.... and not just religious only,but doctors and scientists.

i have provided inexplicable cures that appear supernatural. i asked for the same in return, only to atheists etc. a simple question, yet you havent done it.


look I'm saying that miracles don't exist they are all subconscious. atheists are logical so they don't get it.

Read my debate again.

(ps. deabating the same topic with 100 different people does not make you win)
Debate Round No. 2


id say most experts would agree, even the one's who don't agree that miracles occur.... would say there's probably a physical reason behind the cures, most of them. placebo would have to almost by definition be a much smaller amount.

also placebo and "your brain somehow causing your body to be fixed", are not necessarily the same thing. placebo is you get better cause you think you will by something that happened. something deeper is where you are not necessarily thinking something caused you to get better, you just do, by your brain.
this should affect atheists even all the more cause they don't think it's God healing them. it's something else. if you try to say it's cause they think it's God healing them, then it's a placebo and we should be able to tell that that's only a fraction of explanation.

whatever the case, ive shown plenty of examples of inexplicable tings happening to theists... and you haven't shown one to an atheist, as requested in the initial post. you should be able to if what you say is true. that's the bottom line.


loveu157 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Misterscruffles 3 years ago
"Stubbornness does have its helpful features. You always know what you're going to be thinking tomorrow."
-Glen Beaman
Posted by Skeptikitten 3 years ago
Apparently cut-and-paste versions of the exact same poorly delineated arguments count as debate now?
Posted by glassplotful 3 years ago
Why should we feel compelled to accept your debate when you have the exact same debate going on right no?
Posted by danielawesome12 3 years ago
Why do you never ever debate new topics.
No votes have been placed for this debate.