It just amazes me how almost all videos like this one, or anything religious for that matter, end up in an argument. Can't we respect each other's beliefs even if we don't agree with them? I mean really....no amount of name calling and insults is going to convince the other side that you are right and they are wrong. Just saying....
The most of the debates I've read talk about the origin or the context or the humans involved. The hard facts are: a) There is no previous drawing b) 4 different painting techniques were used c) Face, hands and body are drawn without a single paintbrush d) main body has not been restaurated e) the material was not prepared to recive pigments and is not varnished tho main body is intact... Explain that! I was in front of she I saw it with my own mortal eyes. Is out of mortal comprehension.
Im Named After Our Lady Guadalupe . My Mother Wanted A Little Girl (Me] So She Prayed To Her If She Had Me Then She Was Going To Name Me After Guadalupe . She Is My Hero <3
I'm neither Catholic nor christian. But there ARE miracles: any damn fool who knows the story behind the Sistine Chapel knows that! And in that belief that inspired art IS a miracle, I propose that "Juan Diego" was not some illiterate, Indian peasant, but a gifted artist who was INSPIRED to create this miraculous image. (Divinely inspired, if you like.) But the Church changed the story out of racism, unwilling to credit Indians with such gifts, and the story snowballed into a fairy tale.
@dingorex There's a long history of A) the Church and the Spanish disdaining Indians in the New World (attitudes which persist, to this day, among the mestizos), B) fairy tales explaining mundane things with magic, especially where social prejudice is aroused, and C) heroes being made out to be humbler than they really are, to preach faith in miracles. Read up on "Rhodopis," the first version of Cinderella from Ancient Egypt, for an example of the latter two phenomena in action.
@Tizmaole My point being (sorry for the long response), that The Church wanted to cling to stereotypes about Indians being "simple folk," fit only for farming & labor, and to encourage them to be good, obedient peasants, instead of "uppity" artists. They also wanted to preach faith in God's grace through supernatural miracles, instead of social mobility and invention. So they changed the story.
Every culture pulls this stunt to varying degrees; the Church is just one example.
Specifics to this artifact. All I need are your facts--historical, scientific, that this is just an inspired painting. What is the exact documentation for the tilma of Our Lady Of Guadalupe being a purely human painting (native Mexican-Indian, at that)?
By the by, I'm no longer a Catholic, so it want offend me where you got your information. I just would like the source-data attribution.
@dingorex For starters, the Franciscans claimed it was a human painting, as early as 1556, the first time it appears in records. (Look it up on Wikipedia). But even so, I never claimed to have anything more than a THEORY. It's no more or less "proven" than the legend, and I never said it was, so you have nothing to call me out on, much less any business implying that I'm embittered and/or prejudiced, just for asking questions.
@Tizmaole And by the way, research within the last few minutes has revealed a likely name for the artist: Marcos Cipac de Aquino. He was a native artist active in the area, often suspected to be the "indian painter Marocs" mentioned by the Franciscans. And it seems that a theory paralleling my own has been established among skeptics, for some time....
@Tizmaole Wait, so you are saying that some indian artist painted this whole thing perfectly without even and undersketch? And what about the painting's lack of corruption (aside from of the gold rays that were added after-the-fact)? How would you explain that.... that a painting on coarse fabric could survive over 400 years without even a hairline of a crack of deterioration on the original?
@COice You're damn right that's what I'm saying! It's called "genius," and it's miracle enough for me, thank you. You see, unlike you, I have *faith* in the potential of the human race to accomplish great things; if there is a God, s/he can only inspire us to that potential that s/he gave us. If you deny this, and insist that only divine special effects can make anything happen, then you are a cynic, you insult humanity, and your standards for miracles are simply too high.
@Tizmaole but what about the lack of brush strokes on the original image? And you still haven't explained how the image has not disintegrated on the coarse cactus fiber (which also should have deteriorated) after over 400 years
@COice I don't have to explain it: I'm not the painter. I'm certainly not the one asking people to believe in supernatural magic.
Besides, painting without visible brushstrokes is an long-established technique; Leonardo did it all the time. I've just now found a website by a professional painter, which says it's not even particularly hard!
As for the canvas, there are paintings, murals, and even books many times older, and intact, and they're all human-made. Have some faith in humanity!
@Tizmaole So you are simply going to disregard as irrelevant the remarkable integrity that the image maintains, despite the nearly 500 years that have passed? That does not strike you as odd or perhaps supernatural (in that it goes beyond what is natural), despite the fact that reproductions of the image can barely last less than 20 years?
@COice Frankly, no, and I think that I've made that quite clear. Talking to me in a condescending tone does not make me wrong. It's not supernatural... since it's happened before. Lascaux, anyone?
Moreover, the image was not perfect to begin with: her hair-part is off-center, her irises have drawn-in outlines, etc. Darn fine work for someone painting without an undersketch, but hardly an immaculate, supernatural gift.
I stand by my opinion: the truth is a better story.
@Tizmaole Wait so you are comparing as relevantly comparable the longevity of cave painting (on stone rocks) to the longevity of a painting on organic cactus fiber? I hope you understand that those two would have completely separate deterioration rates. It is universally understood that the image of Guadalupe should have deteriorated--the fabric, let alone the painting itself--by now. But you are saying it is understandable that it has lasted so long, because cave paintings also do. Correct?
@COice Cave paintings AND ancient religious texts (e.g. the 2,000-year-old bible texts at the Monastery of St. Catherine in Egypt) AND ancient buildings AND a million other human-made artifacts. The painting's longevity, alone, is not nearly enough to make me swallow whole the absurd, bigotry-laced fairy tale of a supernatural miracle.
I reject your arguments, as you've refused to even answer mine, retreating into narrower and narrower rants about the painting's age. I'm not backing down.
@Tizmaole Do you even know where the brush strokes were found? They weren't even found, but only ascertained by indirect logic. Rosales found that the eyes &irises have outlines, and from there jumped to the conclusion that they must have been applied by a brush, since in real life eyes and irises have no outlines. Aside from these "brush strokes" outlining the eyes & irises, Rosales as well as Callahan failed to find even one brush. How do you color a painting without a making brush strokes?
@COice I have already answered this question in a previous post. Now you're not even LISTENING; you are repeating arguments that I have already refuted. Clearly you are dishonest in pursuing this matter, and I have defeated you in the argument.
I refuse to believe that this great work of art is the work of a supernatural miracle. I have refuted every assertion that it is, and you are now reduced to lies and harassment to prove it. I will not retract my opinion; discussion closed.
@Tizmaole What questions do you have, and where have I lied or harassed you. I asked you simple questions for clarification. And despite your assertions that other things have lasted a long time, it is unheard of that paintings would last as long as this one have without deteriorating. I'm sure that those cave paintings and texts that you have referred to are heavily worn out (as Lascaux is), yet the painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe is still vivid, with the face and hands without a blemish.
@COice Where have you harassed me? How about badgering me with posts after I've specifically told you we're not talking anymore? What part of "Discussion closed" do you not understand?
You are now bordering on behavior for which you can be reported; you are not merely wrong, you are an obvious psychopath. I am blocking you, and ANY further contact will be reported to the YouTube authorities.
@lucky806 With all due respect, I'm not going to open up this argument again. I spent DAYS trying to fend off the last guy who quarreled with me, to the point where I killfiled him and left the thread. That was MONTHS ago.
Please don't ask me to start arguing again..... because I won't.
@Tizmaole lol i wasn't gonna argue with you,you're as close minded as they come.no sense in arguing with a die hard skeptic.and besides,judging by your comments you seem to be a little out of it.later bro
@lucky806 That's it: you're killfiled, too. You're another troll, who came to pick a fight after the party was over, and now you're trying to bait me with random insults. Good-bye.
@dingorex apparently everyone hates christianity even though christianity hates no one, it has been said even by Jesus himself that all who believe in him will be persecuted and that is exactly what continues to occur today. When i make the sign of the cross when passing by a church people laugh at me, when i make the sign of the cross before eating or for any other reason, people look at me strangely, when i start talking about god and religion, people become uncomfortable and lash out.
all this glory given to an image of a white woman who defied gods command to the jews by creating her own image on a man and allowing millions to worship her. it amazing how naive people can be it probably is miraculous i believe this is not
all this glory given to an image of a white woman who defied gods command to the jews by creating her own image on a man and allowing millions to worship her. it amazing how naive people can be
First of all, the people from Mexico did not know what Guadalupe was. They citing pronounce it, it took them a while. The name Guadalupe was not given by the people but by the Virgin Mary herself!
its not a painting, its like a print... its also said that people from another planet printed the image to stop the killing of natives and spanish that were at cosntant wars at that time. after that image the country reunited as one and the wars stop.
Hail Mary full of grace, blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the time of our death. Amen!
That 500 year time frame is also how long the sacred Incan priests/priestesses hid in high Andes elevation until they fairly recently came out of hiding because the series of prophecies started fulfilling in the 1960s. It's partially related because the Incan priests hid from the conquering Spaniards while the Aztecs were meant to convert.
the Our Lady of Guadalupe title is not correct. This was from another statue in Spain. This was to be called "Mary who crushed the head of the stone serpent" and the vision of Mary was on the same mountain where the native american people worshiped a mother goddess. This is a miracle on par with the shroud of Turin. These are here to convert the world.
@TheCatholicWolf Too bad these unbelievers continue their stupid anti-Catholic talk: "they give thanks to the 'image'". Yeah, whatever, and Catholics "worship" Mary too. At least unbelievers can see that this defies human explanation.
@petrusprimus Exactly why I posted the video. This is indeed physically and scientifically beyond human explanation. Atheists use contradictory arguments and expain away none the image's marvels.
Hey people...it is scientifically proven that the image of the Virgin is not humanly made....SCIENCE PEOPLE!!!! The golden lights are in bad shape and the rest impeccable!!! Let it be note that inside the catholic church there are many sceptics and they send many investigators from all over the world, from any creed to investigate it because obviously the church does not want something that is fraud!
well for you flying science im sorry you feel like that...dont you ever doubt what god doing..mark my word you and your son are son shouldve been ashamed of yourself.....god is the one true god...belive that....you will never get no where if you doubt him and his blesssing...
awesome,research done in this area is extensive just check it out, mindblowing!!! from my personal experience whenever I go to mother,she always leads me to her Son Jesus
Just think. If you didnt have that image of Mary, you couldnt find Christ like the rest of the Christian world has??
You dont have faith that's why you look to the supernatural and get all gooey inside when you stare at an object, thinking that you're being made better when you're only coppin a feel. Sad.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I feel that all of us regarding this image should also consider the possibility of satanic deception. Look at the area that this occurred in. It's Aztec history. Would God send Mary to inform villagers to build a temple by her command? Lucifer, I'm sure, still had a strong hold in this area of Mexico. We should all try and be a little more discerning. Thanks for your time.
I don't care what anyone says regarding this matter...We all believe in God and Jesus...there is no doubt in that..but the Virgen de Guadalupe, the belief and faith that the Mexican people have in her is truly amazing. Since I was very little, I was brought up with this amazing faith in her and no matter what any scientist says or states, she is truly 100 percent part of our beautiful culture...god bless
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Yes the belief and faith oth the Mexican people in her. Research the story behind her, shes as fake as a fake dollar bill. Yea yea i was raised catholic, catholic blind!!!
I just did a research project on the Virgin in my grad work and it is interesting. Whether or not, the apparitions really occurred is unimportant. The impact the Virgin has had on the Mexican people can not be denied. She has influenced Mexico for hundreds of years now, even though the apparition tradition is still being debated. Importantly, I think we should all be respectful of each other's beliefs. And not regard those who trust in the Virgin, as "stupid mexicans." Be respectful.
@ccfreak11 Is your thesis available to read? Thankyou for your respectful comment...I am mexican, and was raised catholic, yet I rebelled against the religion in my adult life. Yet I believe in the Holy Mother and God. There may be hope for me yet!
This is some real stuff. I was looking into this subject really deaply and found out its proven to be true and not made by humans.Also you people should research it and find the truth not just say your opinion.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
It's not real. Really deeply? Did you read about the story of Marcos Aquino? Or that priests used his image of an indian deity to turn them to catholics? Have you read the testimonials of the painters that have declared it to be fake and that it has been re-painted all the time? You should do more research and not to believe fake stuff. But it's your choice to let them brainwash you. Estupido mexicano.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Look up Marcos Aquino, the one who made it. Also look for a letter sent to the Vatican where they accepted it was fake, but the Vatican ignored it. Look for the results of the infrared tests a few years ago. And look for the painters that have been restoring the image, they admit it is fake, even the ayate material is false. Look up in Wikipedia in spanish the story of it, there's no real references to Juan Diego's real existence or that he witnessed a miracle. Stupid mexicans....
No, "He" doesn't encourage it. It's all part of the Mexican political, social, and religious brainwash. This painting is human-made not divine. Did a big research today... how disappointing....
They don't qualify, because the word 'supernatural' applies to that which is literally beyond the natural world.
Anotherwords, the natural world and the supernatural world, are two seperate realms. Aliens are generally described as being a form of of intelligence elsewhere *in* the universe (i.e. natural world).
The Lady of Guadalupe is not a God and is not to be worshipped. Nor graven images such as this. Focus on Christ and not his earthly mother. May God have mercy on all of us.
Well, I think Hillary is in that top group of people some refer to as the NWO. Control freaks, the lot of them. Hatred, greed, and power are their motivations, and they won't stop at anything to gain control over us.
At 60 something years old and she doesn't even know the history of the image. Shows you the state of government run indoctrination. She's dumbed down and sickly pro-death. Sick sucker fish on the most pro-death Kenyan president this country has ever had.
How can an average fence sitter listening to you and I determine if paint is present on the shroud .How to proceed to determine the truth? I want to know for sure .Any suggestions ?
Now you are contradicting yourself. You said real blood would turn black. You want your nothingness at all costs, eh? Even when you play mind tricks with logic. Atheism is indeed a sick belief syndrome.
Ding -you expect real blood to stay red ? I copied a snippet of an article .Real blood painted with a water color brush by an artist .The whole purpose of its creation was to inspire .
The role of artist was to paint religious subjects ,murals and paintings all to inspire .Artists for centuries did religious art and very little else - Church the biggest patrons .
1.I read a few articles on Easter about the shroud .One article claimed 52 painted copies where made of the shroud. The paint transferred from the copies to the "original" , "accidentally ".
The shroud has too many anatomical errors to have come from real person .The cult followers of the shroud refuse to listen to evidence .True believer syndrome of refusing to acknowledge its fake .
And you KNOW what a miraculous image of Jesus' Resurrection should look like anatomically???
And to be perfectly honest I didn't want Christianity to be true or the shroud to be as confounding as it most certainly is.
The preponderance of the evidence leads me to follow Jesus, not any kind of mental syndrome. If it were a fake I wouldn't have posted videos encouraging belief in something that was anti : science, art history, archeology, Jewish burial customs, and sacred scripture.
The proportions are that of a stylized statue not a real person unless with deformaties. The pouncing is achieved by a lose bag dusting it on . It is of ochre pigments .
1. The forger first painted the bloodstains before he painted the image.
2. The forger integrated forensic qualities to his image that would only be known 20th century science.
3. The forger duplicated blood flow patterns in perfect forensic agreement to blood flow from the wrists at 65° from vertical to suggest the exact crucifixion position of the arms.
4. The forger "painted" the blood flows with genuine group AB blood that he had "spiked" with excessive amounts of bilirubin since the forger knew that severe concussive scourging with a Roman flagrum would cause erythrocyte hemolysis and jaundice.
5. The forger "plotted" the scourge marks on the body of the "man in the shroud" to be consistent under forensic examination with two scourgers of varying height.
6. The forger also duplicated abrasion and compression marks on the scourge wounds of the shoulders to suggest to 20th century forensic examiners that the "man in the shroud" had carried a heavy weight following the scourging.
7. The forger, against all convention of medieval artistry, painted the body he was "hoaxing" as Jesus of Nazareth, nude to conform to genuine Roman crucifixions.
8. The forger, as the forensic genius he was, illustrated the nails of crucifixion accurately through the wrists rather than the hands as in all other conventional medieval representations. He also took into account that the thumbs of a crucified victim would rotate inward as a result of median nerve damage as the nails passed through the spaces of Destot.
13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.
13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.
14. This forger was such an expert in 20th century biochemistry, medicine, forensic pathology and anatomy, botany, photography and 3-D computer analysis that he has foiled all the efforts of modern science. His unknown and historically unduplicated artistic technique surpasses all great historical artists, making the pale efforts of DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael and Botticelli appear as infantile scribblings.
If the Shroud of Turin is a forgery of the 14th century, as the radiocarbonists claim, and not a genuine artifact of the 1st century, all of these qualities of the purported medieval "forger" must be accepted. If the Shroud was "forged" it would have to have been painted.
It is an irrefutable fact that there is NO paint or pigment on the Shroud of Turin leaving the only explanation of the technique of the forger to have used "photography" to manufacture the relic in the THIRTEENTH CENTURY!! Some authors have gone so far as to suggest exactly that. This is patently absurd!
The Shroud of Turin is a genuine artifact of a first century Roman crucifixion of an adult Jewish male. The radiocarbon dating placing the manufacture of the linen in the 14th century was flawed by extrinsic C14 accumulated over centuries of fungal growth, candle smoke and the intense heat of the fire of 1532. There is NO paint on the linen of the shroud and is not the artifice of a forger.
2.Ding - what do the harshest critics critics say about the image ? From what Ive read it was ochre pigment with tempera pounced on .Pounce doesn't employ paintbrushes .
In creationism there are 700+ scientists who agree with instant creationism.700 sounds like a lot but they are not even 1 percent of the scientists who disagree .
4. Likewise there is a very small number (less than a dozen?) of scientists who agree with SOME of what you've written .The vast majority dismiss all of this.
Those who suffer from believer syndrome cling to false belief despite being shown the evidence is false . Creationism is classic at this , so is fake religious artifacts .
This is not a matter of personal choice of which camp of scientists you want to side with .Some one is dead wrong .Don't let emotions sway you Think ,analyse ,investigate be informed .
Psychologists are hugely fascinated by this subject , its known that the shroud is not genuine .Their is a cult following who refuses to listen to the experts .Facts dont matter in faith they are ignored .
9. The forger was clever enough to "salt" the linen with the pollens of plants indigenous only to the environs of Jerusalem in anticipation of 20th century palynological analysis.
10. The forger was an artist who surpassed the talents of all known artists to the present day, being able to "paint" an anatomically and photographically perfect human image in a photographic negative manner, centuries before photography, and be able to do so without being able to check his work, close up, as he progressed.
11. The forger was able to paint this image with some unknown medium using an unknown technique, 30-40 feet away in order to discern the shadowy image as he continued.
12. The forger was clever enough to depict an adult with an unplaited pony-tail, sidelocks and a beard style consistent with a Jewish male of the 1st century.
Ding - the shroud has been falsified in every-way .Made from red Ochre on wet sheet over statue ,image was pounced .The blood was painted as well note its crisp not blotted.
The blood was contact applied to the linen, before the image formation, the threads under the blood stains haven't the image oxidation/dehydration properties which make up the body images. This means the blood came first then the body image. The were at least 11 tests by Dr Alan Adler which tested positive for real blood. This is a peer-reviewed fact. The body image does not penetrate further than the first few fibrils into the depth of the threads. Read Isabell Piczac's work on the anatomy.
article:Dried, aged blood is black. The stains on the shroud are red. Forensic tests on the red stuff have identified it as red ocher and vermilion tempera paint. Other tests by Adler and Heller have identified it as blood.*
How many scientists have said pro things about this painting ?How many scientists have said con or critical things ? A handful of opinons isn't enough !
But again, like I said before, you have failed to explain this image scientifically.
Also, again, It's sad you'd take the opinion of skeptic's over ALL the scientists that have actually studied and have done tests on this image hands on. : /
There are hundreds of creation scientists who flat lie out of religious conviction .Jonathan Wells (Mooney disciple)is a scientists who obtained a degree solely to attack evolution.
Supposedly many ape experts and costume experts said the famous video of Big Foot couldn't be faked .there was a zipper seen on a few frames found later .
True believer syndrome is when people refuse to stop believing despite the subject being disproved .Ignoring all naysayers .Coined by James Randi concerning psychics not God .
You can also google atheism and higher IQ's to verify . The high school geeky nerdy intellectual type rarely get in trouble .You have to read a lot to break free from indoctrination .
You can find a few articles on this by copying the tittle and the word skeptical as a google seach .Skeptical sites are the first sites you should read 4 objectivity .
How there is no sizing and no protective over-varnish on the Image. And how the image has consistently defied the exact reproduction whether by brush or camera.
Also, according to Kodak of Mexico, the image is smooth and feels like a modern day photograph. (Produced 300 years before the invention of photography.)
All incredible claims need be thoroughly critically examined .Beware the over enthusiasms exaggerations of believers .Google article-'Miraculous' Image of Guadalupe (Skeptical Briefs June 2002)
Ah, so you list a skeptical site? Just so you know, this has been scientifically reseached again and again.
That's odd, your name being "flyingscience" I was sure you would have know that. Did you not watch the movie? Dr. Phlis, a biophotonics, has reseached this image inside and out, and can't explain it scientificaly.
1.The image shows no sign of deterioration after 450 years! The tilma or cloak of Saint Juan Diego on which the image of Our Lady has been imprinted, is a coarse fabric made from the threads of the maguey cactus. This fiber disintegrates within 20-60 years!
2.Microscopic examination revealed that there were no brush strokes.
MJ - 1.Skeptics -you need objectivity with supernatural claims .2.Scientists -not just one who agrees about big foot and UFOs .You need a scientific consensus /peer review!!!
Well, I'd have to say that the link you posted really helps your case, but it doesn't. Joe Nickell has never in his life investigated this image first hand. He's just an athiest that tries very hard to disprove God. Again, I'll have to stick with ALL the SCIENTISTS that have actually studied this image. :)
It just amazes me how almost all videos like this one, or anything religious for that matter, end up in an argument. Can't we respect each other's beliefs even if we don't agree with them? I mean really....no amount of name calling and insults is going to convince the other side that you are right and they are wrong. Just saying....
205whiteboy 1 month ago
Mary of virgin behind Satan...because everyone blind to Satan make you honor on Satan
Karito2139 2 months ago
fuck this video btw im mexican, Aztec/Mayan/Science ALL DAY EVERYDAY!
BarrioAztrologist89 2 months ago
Woooooooooow. Wouldn't it be considered idolatry? I'm confused "/
SuperJbm1 3 months ago
Okay Tizamole, I'll let you go. May your days be well, and may you walk in virtue.
COice 4 months ago
The most of the debates I've read talk about the origin or the context or the humans involved. The hard facts are: a) There is no previous drawing b) 4 different painting techniques were used c) Face, hands and body are drawn without a single paintbrush d) main body has not been restaurated e) the material was not prepared to recive pigments and is not varnished tho main body is intact... Explain that! I was in front of she I saw it with my own mortal eyes. Is out of mortal comprehension.
makisjnx007 4 months ago
Im Named After Our Lady Guadalupe . My Mother Wanted A Little Girl (Me] So She Prayed To Her If She Had Me Then She Was Going To Name Me After Guadalupe . She Is My Hero <3
SupaaNerdddxD 4 months ago
I'm neither Catholic nor christian. But there ARE miracles: any damn fool who knows the story behind the Sistine Chapel knows that! And in that belief that inspired art IS a miracle, I propose that "Juan Diego" was not some illiterate, Indian peasant, but a gifted artist who was INSPIRED to create this miraculous image. (Divinely inspired, if you like.) But the Church changed the story out of racism, unwilling to credit Indians with such gifts, and the story snowballed into a fairy tale.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole
What source(s) would make one come to such a conclusion? Do you have an axe to grind with Christianity?
Are you a bitter tergiversater? Just curious.
dingorex 4 months ago
@dingorex There's a long history of A) the Church and the Spanish disdaining Indians in the New World (attitudes which persist, to this day, among the mestizos), B) fairy tales explaining mundane things with magic, especially where social prejudice is aroused, and C) heroes being made out to be humbler than they really are, to preach faith in miracles. Read up on "Rhodopis," the first version of Cinderella from Ancient Egypt, for an example of the latter two phenomena in action.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole My point being (sorry for the long response), that The Church wanted to cling to stereotypes about Indians being "simple folk," fit only for farming & labor, and to encourage them to be good, obedient peasants, instead of "uppity" artists. They also wanted to preach faith in God's grace through supernatural miracles, instead of social mobility and invention. So they changed the story.
Every culture pulls this stunt to varying degrees; the Church is just one example.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole
Specifics to this artifact. All I need are your facts--historical, scientific, that this is just an inspired painting. What is the exact documentation for the tilma of Our Lady Of Guadalupe being a purely human painting (native Mexican-Indian, at that)?
By the by, I'm no longer a Catholic, so it want offend me where you got your information. I just would like the source-data attribution.
dingorex 4 months ago
@dingorex For starters, the Franciscans claimed it was a human painting, as early as 1556, the first time it appears in records. (Look it up on Wikipedia). But even so, I never claimed to have anything more than a THEORY. It's no more or less "proven" than the legend, and I never said it was, so you have nothing to call me out on, much less any business implying that I'm embittered and/or prejudiced, just for asking questions.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole And by the way, research within the last few minutes has revealed a likely name for the artist: Marcos Cipac de Aquino. He was a native artist active in the area, often suspected to be the "indian painter Marocs" mentioned by the Franciscans. And it seems that a theory paralleling my own has been established among skeptics, for some time....
Tizmaole 4 months ago
Comment removed
COice 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tizmaole Wait, so you are saying that some indian artist painted this whole thing perfectly without even and undersketch? And what about the painting's lack of corruption (aside from of the gold rays that were added after-the-fact)? How would you explain that.... that a painting on coarse fabric could survive over 400 years without even a hairline of a crack of deterioration on the original?
COice 4 months ago
@COice You're damn right that's what I'm saying! It's called "genius," and it's miracle enough for me, thank you. You see, unlike you, I have *faith* in the potential of the human race to accomplish great things; if there is a God, s/he can only inspire us to that potential that s/he gave us. If you deny this, and insist that only divine special effects can make anything happen, then you are a cynic, you insult humanity, and your standards for miracles are simply too high.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole but what about the lack of brush strokes on the original image? And you still haven't explained how the image has not disintegrated on the coarse cactus fiber (which also should have deteriorated) after over 400 years
COice 4 months ago
@COice I don't have to explain it: I'm not the painter. I'm certainly not the one asking people to believe in supernatural magic.
Besides, painting without visible brushstrokes is an long-established technique; Leonardo did it all the time. I've just now found a website by a professional painter, which says it's not even particularly hard!
As for the canvas, there are paintings, murals, and even books many times older, and intact, and they're all human-made. Have some faith in humanity!
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole So you are simply going to disregard as irrelevant the remarkable integrity that the image maintains, despite the nearly 500 years that have passed? That does not strike you as odd or perhaps supernatural (in that it goes beyond what is natural), despite the fact that reproductions of the image can barely last less than 20 years?
COice 4 months ago
@COice Frankly, no, and I think that I've made that quite clear. Talking to me in a condescending tone does not make me wrong. It's not supernatural... since it's happened before. Lascaux, anyone?
Moreover, the image was not perfect to begin with: her hair-part is off-center, her irises have drawn-in outlines, etc. Darn fine work for someone painting without an undersketch, but hardly an immaculate, supernatural gift.
I stand by my opinion: the truth is a better story.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole Wait so you are comparing as relevantly comparable the longevity of cave painting (on stone rocks) to the longevity of a painting on organic cactus fiber? I hope you understand that those two would have completely separate deterioration rates. It is universally understood that the image of Guadalupe should have deteriorated--the fabric, let alone the painting itself--by now. But you are saying it is understandable that it has lasted so long, because cave paintings also do. Correct?
COice 4 months ago
@COice Cave paintings AND ancient religious texts (e.g. the 2,000-year-old bible texts at the Monastery of St. Catherine in Egypt) AND ancient buildings AND a million other human-made artifacts. The painting's longevity, alone, is not nearly enough to make me swallow whole the absurd, bigotry-laced fairy tale of a supernatural miracle.
I reject your arguments, as you've refused to even answer mine, retreating into narrower and narrower rants about the painting's age. I'm not backing down.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole Do you even know where the brush strokes were found? They weren't even found, but only ascertained by indirect logic. Rosales found that the eyes &irises have outlines, and from there jumped to the conclusion that they must have been applied by a brush, since in real life eyes and irises have no outlines. Aside from these "brush strokes" outlining the eyes & irises, Rosales as well as Callahan failed to find even one brush. How do you color a painting without a making brush strokes?
COice 4 months ago
@COice I have already answered this question in a previous post. Now you're not even LISTENING; you are repeating arguments that I have already refuted. Clearly you are dishonest in pursuing this matter, and I have defeated you in the argument.
I refuse to believe that this great work of art is the work of a supernatural miracle. I have refuted every assertion that it is, and you are now reduced to lies and harassment to prove it. I will not retract my opinion; discussion closed.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole What questions do you have, and where have I lied or harassed you. I asked you simple questions for clarification. And despite your assertions that other things have lasted a long time, it is unheard of that paintings would last as long as this one have without deteriorating. I'm sure that those cave paintings and texts that you have referred to are heavily worn out (as Lascaux is), yet the painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe is still vivid, with the face and hands without a blemish.
COice 4 months ago
@COice Where have you harassed me? How about badgering me with posts after I've specifically told you we're not talking anymore? What part of "Discussion closed" do you not understand?
You are now bordering on behavior for which you can be reported; you are not merely wrong, you are an obvious psychopath. I am blocking you, and ANY further contact will be reported to the YouTube authorities.
Tizmaole 4 months ago
@Tizmaole even if the painting was done by diego himself that doesn't explain how the image has survived for so long with no signs of decay or aging.
lucky806 6 days ago
@lucky806 With all due respect, I'm not going to open up this argument again. I spent DAYS trying to fend off the last guy who quarreled with me, to the point where I killfiled him and left the thread. That was MONTHS ago.
Please don't ask me to start arguing again..... because I won't.
Tizmaole 6 days ago
@Tizmaole lol i wasn't gonna argue with you,you're as close minded as they come.no sense in arguing with a die hard skeptic.and besides,judging by your comments you seem to be a little out of it.later bro
lucky806 4 days ago
@lucky806 That's it: you're killfiled, too. You're another troll, who came to pick a fight after the party was over, and now you're trying to bait me with random insults. Good-bye.
Tizmaole 4 days ago
@dingorex apparently everyone hates christianity even though christianity hates no one, it has been said even by Jesus himself that all who believe in him will be persecuted and that is exactly what continues to occur today. When i make the sign of the cross when passing by a church people laugh at me, when i make the sign of the cross before eating or for any other reason, people look at me strangely, when i start talking about god and religion, people become uncomfortable and lash out.
venian646 3 weeks ago
all this glory given to an image of a white woman who defied gods command to the jews by creating her own image on a man and allowing millions to worship her. it amazing how naive people can be it probably is miraculous i believe this is not
from god d
ljkupiec 4 months ago
all this glory given to an image of a white woman who defied gods command to the jews by creating her own image on a man and allowing millions to worship her. it amazing how naive people can be
ljkupiec 4 months ago
First of all, the people from Mexico did not know what Guadalupe was. They citing pronounce it, it took them a while. The name Guadalupe was not given by the people but by the Virgin Mary herself!
winerts 6 months ago
fairy tale
alderete74 9 months ago
@alderete74 But amazingly a proof for the supernatural. Now materialism, that's a fairy tale!
dingorex 9 months ago 5
i went to see her....and Mexico city is amazin :D
claudiaiveth1 10 months ago
its not a painting, its like a print... its also said that people from another planet printed the image to stop the killing of natives and spanish that were at cosntant wars at that time. after that image the country reunited as one and the wars stop.
georgemrr 1 year ago
Thanks for the post DingoRex.
Hail Mary full of grace, blessed are you among women and blessed is the fruit of your womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the time of our death. Amen!
mrcappetto 1 year ago 5
looks like a painting to me...
osheal 1 year ago
That 500 year time frame is also how long the sacred Incan priests/priestesses hid in high Andes elevation until they fairly recently came out of hiding because the series of prophecies started fulfilling in the 1960s. It's partially related because the Incan priests hid from the conquering Spaniards while the Aztecs were meant to convert.
Monica1C3 1 year ago
Leonardo da Sanchez painted it.
dkw12002 1 year ago
@dkw12002 ^Dumb.
madballer2269 11 months ago
the Our Lady of Guadalupe title is not correct. This was from another statue in Spain. This was to be called "Mary who crushed the head of the stone serpent" and the vision of Mary was on the same mountain where the native american people worshiped a mother goddess. This is a miracle on par with the shroud of Turin. These are here to convert the world.
gjwaters 1 year ago
dingorex: thanks for posting.
TheCatholicWolf 1 year ago 7
@TheCatholicWolf You're welcome:)
dingorex 1 year ago
@dingorex ATHIESTS they just dont get it do they
mufc99ok 9 months ago
@TheCatholicWolf Too bad these unbelievers continue their stupid anti-Catholic talk: "they give thanks to the 'image'". Yeah, whatever, and Catholics "worship" Mary too. At least unbelievers can see that this defies human explanation.
petrusprimus 9 months ago 3
@petrusprimus Exactly why I posted the video. This is indeed physically and scientifically beyond human explanation. Atheists use contradictory arguments and expain away none the image's marvels.
dingorex 9 months ago 2
@dingorex And of course the pagans at "Unsolved Mysteries" are only getting at about 1/100 of the evidence that proves this amazing miracle!!!
petrusprimus 9 months ago
Hey people...it is scientifically proven that the image of the Virgin is not humanly made....SCIENCE PEOPLE!!!! The golden lights are in bad shape and the rest impeccable!!! Let it be note that inside the catholic church there are many sceptics and they send many investigators from all over the world, from any creed to investigate it because obviously the church does not want something that is fraud!
flormat30 1 year ago 10
amazing!!!!! JESUS AND GOSPA FOREVER
tdonn07 2 years ago
pregatedidiopregatedidio
pregatedidio 2 years ago
Great miracle!
Some are claiming satanic deception. Why? Look at the fruit, the Aztecs became believers in Christ.
antoniov64 2 years ago 16
well for you flying science im sorry you feel like that...dont you ever doubt what god doing..mark my word you and your son are son shouldve been ashamed of yourself.....god is the one true god...belive that....you will never get no where if you doubt him and his blesssing...
1aelasi 2 years ago 2
That's Tonantzin.
eltigreoso 2 years ago
Just look at what happened in 500 years, it is
awesome,research done in this area is extensive just check it out, mindblowing!!! from my personal experience whenever I go to mother,she always leads me to her Son Jesus
jessyakkara 2 years ago 5
Just think. If you didnt have that image of Mary, you couldnt find Christ like the rest of the Christian world has??
You dont have faith that's why you look to the supernatural and get all gooey inside when you stare at an object, thinking that you're being made better when you're only coppin a feel. Sad.
snownuke 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I feel that all of us regarding this image should also consider the possibility of satanic deception. Look at the area that this occurred in. It's Aztec history. Would God send Mary to inform villagers to build a temple by her command? Lucifer, I'm sure, still had a strong hold in this area of Mexico. We should all try and be a little more discerning. Thanks for your time.
joecota 2 years ago
I don't care what anyone says regarding this matter...We all believe in God and Jesus...there is no doubt in that..but the Virgen de Guadalupe, the belief and faith that the Mexican people have in her is truly amazing. Since I was very little, I was brought up with this amazing faith in her and no matter what any scientist says or states, she is truly 100 percent part of our beautiful culture...god bless
LULUMEX1 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes the belief and faith oth the Mexican people in her. Research the story behind her, shes as fake as a fake dollar bill. Yea yea i was raised catholic, catholic blind!!!
Beaute8 2 years ago
@Beaute8: well the latest research in 2007 found it impossible so lol..
RockyBalboa211 2 years ago
@LULUMEX1 ...so you are resolved to love your personal demon.
bella50008 1 year ago
I just did a research project on the Virgin in my grad work and it is interesting. Whether or not, the apparitions really occurred is unimportant. The impact the Virgin has had on the Mexican people can not be denied. She has influenced Mexico for hundreds of years now, even though the apparition tradition is still being debated. Importantly, I think we should all be respectful of each other's beliefs. And not regard those who trust in the Virgin, as "stupid mexicans." Be respectful.
ccfreak11 2 years ago 24
Taco Bell has had major impact on Mexicans too? Is that a miracle God has worked down there too?
snownuke 2 years ago
@ccfreak11 Is your thesis available to read? Thankyou for your respectful comment...I am mexican, and was raised catholic, yet I rebelled against the religion in my adult life. Yet I believe in the Holy Mother and God. There may be hope for me yet!
annahrwth242 1 year ago
My son is an art student . He explained if God can make all life in 6 days .He sure as hell cant paint .(dosent reflect supernatural art talent )
flyingscience 2 years ago
This is some real stuff. I was looking into this subject really deaply and found out its proven to be true and not made by humans.Also you people should research it and find the truth not just say your opinion.
vdoger 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It's not real. Really deeply? Did you read about the story of Marcos Aquino? Or that priests used his image of an indian deity to turn them to catholics? Have you read the testimonials of the painters that have declared it to be fake and that it has been re-painted all the time? You should do more research and not to believe fake stuff. But it's your choice to let them brainwash you. Estupido mexicano.
Redbloodedsky 2 years ago
yes, I agree that a lot is Mexico's overtake of it's people's minds, especially on religion.
But, I'm curious, where'd did you look that led you to conclude the painting is man-made? Because if it is, I want to know.
Livelyanv 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Look up Marcos Aquino, the one who made it. Also look for a letter sent to the Vatican where they accepted it was fake, but the Vatican ignored it. Look for the results of the infrared tests a few years ago. And look for the painters that have been restoring the image, they admit it is fake, even the ayate material is false. Look up in Wikipedia in spanish the story of it, there's no real references to Juan Diego's real existence or that he witnessed a miracle. Stupid mexicans....
Redbloodedsky 2 years ago
pretty intense, i'll definitely read into this, many thanks =)
Livelyanv 2 years ago
You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe. Carl Sagan's quote
gadslca 2 years ago
I'm not trying to convince anybody. I really don't care about other people's ignorance.
Redbloodedsky 2 years ago
Everybody is ignorant of something, unless you know everything. It`s good you don't care about other's people ignorance. Care about your own.
gadslca 2 years ago
I do agree that the painting is of supernatural origin, but I do not think it is from God.
Livelyanv 2 years ago
lol so it's from aliens? What makes you "think" it's not from God?
Redbloodedsky 2 years ago
aliens do not qualify as supernatural.
I should be more specific, I do not think the *God of the bible* would do this, because he doesn't encourage -at all- Marian worship.
Livelyanv 2 years ago
Why don't they qualify? Explain.
No, "He" doesn't encourage it. It's all part of the Mexican political, social, and religious brainwash. This painting is human-made not divine. Did a big research today... how disappointing....
Redbloodedsky 2 years ago
They don't qualify, because the word 'supernatural' applies to that which is literally beyond the natural world.
Anotherwords, the natural world and the supernatural world, are two seperate realms. Aliens are generally described as being a form of of intelligence elsewhere *in* the universe (i.e. natural world).
Livelyanv 2 years ago
The Lady of Guadalupe is not a God and is not to be worshipped. Nor graven images such as this. Focus on Christ and not his earthly mother. May God have mercy on all of us.
theirishinc 2 years ago
Well, I think Hillary is in that top group of people some refer to as the NWO. Control freaks, the lot of them. Hatred, greed, and power are their motivations, and they won't stop at anything to gain control over us.
Our Lady of Guadalupe, protect us!
May God have mercy on them.
t1u9b8a8 2 years ago 3
if you joint to back to time is mean you can see the same star what virgen guadalupe has around tunican
theelinventore 2 years ago
Robert Stack is the best, bitches
IHONDURASI 2 years ago
At 60 something years old and she doesn't even know the history of the image. Shows you the state of government run indoctrination. She's dumbed down and sickly pro-death. Sick sucker fish on the most pro-death Kenyan president this country has ever had.
dingorex 2 years ago
One article claimed the shroud was made as a Birthday present to a pope .
flyingscience 2 years ago
How can an average fence sitter listening to you and I determine if paint is present on the shroud .How to proceed to determine the truth? I want to know for sure .Any suggestions ?
flyingscience 2 years ago
1.Ding - looks like you lost some sleep and was busy typing or pasting . Lets cut to the chase and make this very ,very simple .
flyingscience 2 years ago
I would venture it was painted with paint ,and real blood at some latter time .Remember these cloths where made to inspire ,there are others .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Now you are contradicting yourself. You said real blood would turn black. You want your nothingness at all costs, eh? Even when you play mind tricks with logic. Atheism is indeed a sick belief syndrome.
dingorex 2 years ago 4
Ding -you expect real blood to stay red ? I copied a snippet of an article .Real blood painted with a water color brush by an artist .The whole purpose of its creation was to inspire .
flyingscience 2 years ago
If its paint in the fabric then your entire argument fails .Someone is lying or under informed .Please research if its paint or not .
flyingscience 2 years ago
The role of artist was to paint religious subjects ,murals and paintings all to inspire .Artists for centuries did religious art and very little else - Church the biggest patrons .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Comment removed
flyingscience 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1.I read a few articles on Easter about the shroud .One article claimed 52 painted copies where made of the shroud. The paint transferred from the copies to the "original" , "accidentally ".
flyingscience 2 years ago
The shroud has too many anatomical errors to have come from real person .The cult followers of the shroud refuse to listen to evidence .True believer syndrome of refusing to acknowledge its fake .
flyingscience 2 years ago
And you KNOW what a miraculous image of Jesus' Resurrection should look like anatomically???
And to be perfectly honest I didn't want Christianity to be true or the shroud to be as confounding as it most certainly is.
The preponderance of the evidence leads me to follow Jesus, not any kind of mental syndrome. If it were a fake I wouldn't have posted videos encouraging belief in something that was anti : science, art history, archeology, Jewish burial customs, and sacred scripture.
dingorex 2 years ago
The proportions are that of a stylized statue not a real person unless with deformaties. The pouncing is achieved by a lose bag dusting it on . It is of ochre pigments .
flyingscience 2 years ago
1. The forger first painted the bloodstains before he painted the image.
2. The forger integrated forensic qualities to his image that would only be known 20th century science.
3. The forger duplicated blood flow patterns in perfect forensic agreement to blood flow from the wrists at 65° from vertical to suggest the exact crucifixion position of the arms.
dingorex 2 years ago
4. The forger "painted" the blood flows with genuine group AB blood that he had "spiked" with excessive amounts of bilirubin since the forger knew that severe concussive scourging with a Roman flagrum would cause erythrocyte hemolysis and jaundice.
5. The forger "plotted" the scourge marks on the body of the "man in the shroud" to be consistent under forensic examination with two scourgers of varying height.
dingorex 2 years ago
6. The forger also duplicated abrasion and compression marks on the scourge wounds of the shoulders to suggest to 20th century forensic examiners that the "man in the shroud" had carried a heavy weight following the scourging.
7. The forger, against all convention of medieval artistry, painted the body he was "hoaxing" as Jesus of Nazareth, nude to conform to genuine Roman crucifixions.
dingorex 2 years ago
8. The forger, as the forensic genius he was, illustrated the nails of crucifixion accurately through the wrists rather than the hands as in all other conventional medieval representations. He also took into account that the thumbs of a crucified victim would rotate inward as a result of median nerve damage as the nails passed through the spaces of Destot.
dingorex 2 years ago
13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.
dingorex 2 years ago
13. The forger thought of such minute details as incorporating dirt from the bare feet of the "man in the shroud" consistent with the calcium carbonate soil of the environs of Jerusalem.
dingorex 2 years ago
14. This forger was such an expert in 20th century biochemistry, medicine, forensic pathology and anatomy, botany, photography and 3-D computer analysis that he has foiled all the efforts of modern science. His unknown and historically unduplicated artistic technique surpasses all great historical artists, making the pale efforts of DaVinci, Michaelangelo, Raphael and Botticelli appear as infantile scribblings.
dingorex 2 years ago
If the Shroud of Turin is a forgery of the 14th century, as the radiocarbonists claim, and not a genuine artifact of the 1st century, all of these qualities of the purported medieval "forger" must be accepted. If the Shroud was "forged" it would have to have been painted.
dingorex 2 years ago
It is an irrefutable fact that there is NO paint or pigment on the Shroud of Turin leaving the only explanation of the technique of the forger to have used "photography" to manufacture the relic in the THIRTEENTH CENTURY!! Some authors have gone so far as to suggest exactly that. This is patently absurd!
dingorex 2 years ago
CONCLUSION
The Shroud of Turin is a genuine artifact of a first century Roman crucifixion of an adult Jewish male. The radiocarbon dating placing the manufacture of the linen in the 14th century was flawed by extrinsic C14 accumulated over centuries of fungal growth, candle smoke and the intense heat of the fire of 1532. There is NO paint on the linen of the shroud and is not the artifice of a forger.
dingorex 2 years ago
2.Ding - what do the harshest critics critics say about the image ? From what Ive read it was ochre pigment with tempera pounced on .Pounce doesn't employ paintbrushes .
flyingscience 2 years ago
In creationism there are 700+ scientists who agree with instant creationism.700 sounds like a lot but they are not even 1 percent of the scientists who disagree .
flyingscience 2 years ago
4. Likewise there is a very small number (less than a dozen?) of scientists who agree with SOME of what you've written .The vast majority dismiss all of this.
flyingscience 2 years ago
I personaly would love to see evidence and verification of God to be proven and found , but I won't play tricks of believer syndrome on myself .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Those who suffer from believer syndrome cling to false belief despite being shown the evidence is false . Creationism is classic at this , so is fake religious artifacts .
flyingscience 2 years ago
This is not a matter of personal choice of which camp of scientists you want to side with .Some one is dead wrong .Don't let emotions sway you Think ,analyse ,investigate be informed .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Comment removed
flyingscience 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Here is a short video that presents clear thinking analysis .I encourage all to listen ,digest and consider .
watch?v=vqNg668402Q
flyingscience 2 years ago
Psychologists are hugely fascinated by this subject , its known that the shroud is not genuine .Their is a cult following who refuses to listen to the experts .Facts dont matter in faith they are ignored .
flyingscience 2 years ago
9. The forger was clever enough to "salt" the linen with the pollens of plants indigenous only to the environs of Jerusalem in anticipation of 20th century palynological analysis.
dingorex 2 years ago
10. The forger was an artist who surpassed the talents of all known artists to the present day, being able to "paint" an anatomically and photographically perfect human image in a photographic negative manner, centuries before photography, and be able to do so without being able to check his work, close up, as he progressed.
11. The forger was able to paint this image with some unknown medium using an unknown technique, 30-40 feet away in order to discern the shadowy image as he continued.
dingorex 2 years ago
12. The forger was clever enough to depict an adult with an unplaited pony-tail, sidelocks and a beard style consistent with a Jewish male of the 1st century.
dingorex 2 years ago
Ding - the shroud has been falsified in every-way .Made from red Ochre on wet sheet over statue ,image was pounced .The blood was painted as well note its crisp not blotted.
flyingscience 2 years ago
The blood was contact applied to the linen, before the image formation, the threads under the blood stains haven't the image oxidation/dehydration properties which make up the body images. This means the blood came first then the body image. The were at least 11 tests by Dr Alan Adler which tested positive for real blood. This is a peer-reviewed fact. The body image does not penetrate further than the first few fibrils into the depth of the threads. Read Isabell Piczac's work on the anatomy.
dingorex 2 years ago
article:Dried, aged blood is black. The stains on the shroud are red. Forensic tests on the red stuff have identified it as red ocher and vermilion tempera paint. Other tests by Adler and Heller have identified it as blood.*
flyingscience 2 years ago
Comment removed
flyingscience 2 years ago
Could those who instituted religion be motivated by money power and control ?
Cough ,Cough ,Indulgences ring a bell ?
Relic belief /non belief is inconsequential to the hereafter .
flyingscience 2 years ago
test
flyingscience 2 years ago
Was the painting sealed , does it have cracks and blemishes , does it have sketch lines and errors and brushstrokes ? Depends whom you ask .
flyingscience 2 years ago
How many scientists have said pro things about this painting ?How many scientists have said con or critical things ? A handful of opinons isn't enough !
flyingscience 2 years ago
Most your preconceptions about atheists are inverse . Most know the bible better than theists .Most Christians are biblically illiterate .
flyingscience 2 years ago
But again, like I said before, you have failed to explain this image scientifically.
Also, again, It's sad you'd take the opinion of skeptic's over ALL the scientists that have actually studied and have done tests on this image hands on. : /
MJCraddock 2 years ago
There are hundreds of creation scientists who flat lie out of religious conviction .Jonathan Wells (Mooney disciple)is a scientists who obtained a degree solely to attack evolution.
flyingscience 2 years ago
There are real anthropologists that have acknowledged big foot films .Most mainstream scientists laugh at them though .Peer review is crucial .
flyingscience 2 years ago
really? like who? lol I'd laugh, it's not like big foot can be studied in a lab.
This image can be, though.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Supposedly many ape experts and costume experts said the famous video of Big Foot couldn't be faked .there was a zipper seen on a few frames found later .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Ah a zipper? And how long has this video been out? Longer than, let's say, 478 years, like this image? Doubt that.
Scientists who do actaully get to see this relic up close, and in hands, have found it to be unexplainable, in many aspects.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
True believer syndrome is when people refuse to stop believing despite the subject being disproved .Ignoring all naysayers .Coined by James Randi concerning psychics not God .
flyingscience 2 years ago
lol ok flyingscience. And just to let you know, you're putting your periods in the front of your sentences, not the ends.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
You can also google atheism and higher IQ's to verify . The high school geeky nerdy intellectual type rarely get in trouble .You have to read a lot to break free from indoctrination .
flyingscience 2 years ago
Claim A. no brush strokes .Claim B has brush strokes .Who is telling the truth ?
flyingscience 2 years ago
Please send me the link where you're getting the information that this image has brush strokes.
Let's hope it's not a skeptic's site lol.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
You can find a few articles on this by copying the tittle and the word skeptical as a google seach .Skeptical sites are the first sites you should read 4 objectivity .
flyingscience 2 years ago
You'd take a skeptic's word over ALL the scientists that have studied this image?
Now that's bad science, flyingscience.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
How it is possible to explain this image and its consistency in time without colors, on a fabric that has not been treated?
MJCraddock 2 years ago
How there is no sizing and no protective over-varnish on the Image. And how the image has consistently defied the exact reproduction whether by brush or camera.
Thank you.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
I'm a commercial artist , I can paint portraits with out any pencil lines .Paint can and does last thousands of years -Egyptian murals .
flyingscience 2 years ago
I'm happy you're a commerical artist, but you still have failed to explain this image scientifically.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Although most art on cactus paper will deteriorate it could survive if stored well .Law of probability only the ones that can survive by storage did.
flyingscience 2 years ago
You are either deaf, or you didn't watch the video. Please watch 0:47.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Also, according to Kodak of Mexico, the image is smooth and feels like a modern day photograph. (Produced 300 years before the invention of photography.)
MJCraddock 2 years ago
All incredible claims need be thoroughly critically examined .Beware the over enthusiasms exaggerations of believers .Google article-'Miraculous' Image of Guadalupe (Skeptical Briefs June 2002)
flyingscience 2 years ago
Ah, so you list a skeptical site? Just so you know, this has been scientifically reseached again and again.
That's odd, your name being "flyingscience" I was sure you would have know that. Did you not watch the movie? Dr. Phlis, a biophotonics, has reseached this image inside and out, and can't explain it scientificaly.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
And it's also very sad you'd take a skeptic's word over all the scientisits who have studied this image.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
you fail.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Your brain fails on religion.
flyingscience 2 years ago
lol oh really now? Says who? you?
ahahah you're the one with the display name of "flying science" and you've fail to explain this image scientifically. Your science fails there. :/
MJCraddock 2 years ago
If God where to make artwork miraculously from scratch dont you think he could make a painting that surpasses anything a human could do ?
flyingscience 2 years ago
lol you really are a fool, aren't you?
This image hasn't been reproduced by any person to this date. Any and all paintings that have tried to have failed miserably.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Be specific in your claims .What cant be reproduced ? I can photograph it and I can paint to look indistinguishable from the original !
flyingscience 2 years ago
Sure! here's a list.
1.The image shows no sign of deterioration after 450 years! The tilma or cloak of Saint Juan Diego on which the image of Our Lady has been imprinted, is a coarse fabric made from the threads of the maguey cactus. This fiber disintegrates within 20-60 years!
2.Microscopic examination revealed that there were no brush strokes.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
MJ- If the claim is fantastical you need to back it up with fantastical evidence . Paper can last for Millenia and has .(Egyptians ) .
flyingscience 2 years ago
This image wasn't made of egyptian papyrus. And all images that are painted on papytus are know to man what substance they're made of.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
MJ - 1.Skeptics -you need objectivity with supernatural claims .2.Scientists -not just one who agrees about big foot and UFOs .You need a scientific consensus /peer review!!!
flyingscience 2 years ago
Let's get this straight fs, not just "some" of the scientists who have researched this image found it supernatural, but ALL.
Taking a skeptic's opinion over ALL the scientists who have researched this image is sad on your part.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
Google :Our Lady of Watsonville - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepd
flyingscience 2 years ago
Tisk Tisk flying science, again, taking a skeptic's word over ALL the scientists isn't very scientific of you.
MJCraddock 2 years ago
All scientists are skeptical its part of the scientific process .The article I mentioned rebuts every one of your points . Did I leave a point out?
flyingscience 2 years ago
Well, I'd have to say that the link you posted really helps your case, but it doesn't. Joe Nickell has never in his life investigated this image first hand. He's just an athiest that tries very hard to disprove God. Again, I'll have to stick with ALL the SCIENTISTS that have actually studied this image. :)