Fatima: Did 70,000 people witness a miracle?

[JaredJames]

Get everyone to predict the landing site of a meteor, what are the odds someone comes up trumps? Surprisingly high.

I'd be interested to see how many other predictions are made and fail to occur. We humans have a thing with only remembering the good stuff and ignoring everything else. These kids could have been predicting things wrongly all their lives, they finally get one right and wow, it's a miracle.

 

[nismaratwork]

Get everyone to predict the landing site of a meteor, what are the odds someone comes up trumps? Surprisingly high.

I'd be interested to see how many other predictions are made and fail to occur. We humans have a thing with only remembering the good stuff and ignoring everything else. These kids could have been predicting things wrongly all their lives, they finally get one right and wow, it's a miracle.

Hey, get that prediction, give it a decade, and not only will everyone have SEEN the meteor... they'll have a piece to sell or show you... honest!

 

[JaredJames]

Hey, get that prediction, give it a decade, and not only will everyone have SEEN the meteor... they'll have a piece to sell or show you... honest!

Always reminds me of Blackadder (UK TV comedy) where one actor has a "bone from the finger of Christ" and paid a lot of money for it. After he's finished explaining about it, another character turns around, looking shocked and says "I thought they only came in packs of ten!".

 

[nismaratwork]

Always reminds me of Blackadder (UK TV comedy) where one actor has a "bone from the finger of Christ" and paid a lot of money for it. After he's finished explaining about it, another character turns around, looking shocked and says "I thought they only came in packs of ten!".

Great show, and great point.

 

[cephron]

Get everyone to predict the landing site of a meteor, what are the odds someone comes up trumps? Surprisingly high.

I'd be interested to see how many other predictions are made and fail to occur. We humans have a thing with only remembering the good stuff and ignoring everything else. These kids could have been predicting things wrongly all their lives, they finally get one right and wow, it's a miracle.

Can't rule it out.

But how many times did the newspapers publish the "miracle" prediction and get 10,000+ people to gather at the supposed site at the supposed time? It could have happened a handful of times, yes. But for an extraordinary meteorogical event to occur, localized to the specified time and place (within the day; within ~50 km,?), on one of those rare occasions when a huge number people were gathered to witness a supposed miracle that was predicted months before...those odds don't seem to stack up very favorably?

I'm not claiming that it was in fact a miracle, I just don't think it can be debunked effectively by proving it was some sort of weather phenomenon.

 

[JaredJames]

Can't rule it out.

But how many times did the newspapers publish the "miracle" prediction and get 10,000+ people to gather at the supposed site at the supposed time? It could have happened a handful of times, yes. But for an extraordinary meteorogical event to occur, localized to the specified time and place (within the day; within ~50 km,?), on one of those rare occasions when a huge number people were gathered to witness a supposed miracle that was predicted months before...those odds don't seem to stack up very favorably?

I'm not claiming that it was in fact a miracle, I just don't think it can be debunked effectively by proving it was some sort of weather phenomenon.

And what is the standing population of the area it occurred in? How many of those people gathered and weren't "simply there" and suddenly became "part of the gathered group"?

There are millions and millions of prediction made everyday all over the world, the odds of one, or even a few coming true are quite favourable - assuming this really occurred.

Now, that aside, I'm not old enough to know of other news reports from the time, but it would be interesting to know exactly how many predictions were made.

 

[Evo]

The people that went there were mostly devoutly religious expecting to see something, then someone says, "There!" and starts describing it, and others wanting to also witness it convince themselves of it, and the mass hysteria starts.

 

[JaredJames]

The people that went there were mostly devoutly religious expecting to see something, then someone says, "There!" and starts describing it, and others wanting to also witness it convince themselves of it, and the mass hysteria starts.

Bingo!

 

[nismaratwork]

The people that went there were mostly devoutly religious expecting to see something, then someone says, "There!" and starts describing it, and others wanting to also witness it convince themselves of it, and the mass hysteria starts.

...AND it was in the context of an ongoing argument with a secular portion of society. How fortuitous that there was a miracle... probably nothing more impressive than a cloud-break.

 

[GODISMYSHADOW]

This may not be the best source but it tells the basic story.


http://fatima.ie/

If in fact some large percentage of the 70,000 actual observed what they say, and if the reports are fairly consistent, then there is only one explanation that would be consistent with science and the reported facts: What they saw was not the sun.

Russ, thanks for mentioning it. It is ironic that as an ex-Catholic, it never occurred to me to start a thread about this.

What do you mean by miracle? To me, it can mean one of two things:

(1) A true miracle: Something positive that happens which completely defies the laws of physics; a scientific impossibility.

(2) A lesser miracle: An extremely unlikely positive occurence, like getting all six numbers right in the Power Ball lottery.

According the great psychologist Carl Jung, UFO's occur in three ways: in dreams, in paintings and as rumors. This is a case where UFO's occur as a rumor.

 

[JaredJames]

What do you mean by miracle? To me, it can mean one of two things:

(1) A true miracle: Something positive that happens which completely defies the laws of physics; a scientific impossibility.

(2) A lesser miracle: An extremely unlikely positive occurence, like getting all six numbers right in the Power Ball lottery.

Number 1 should be defies scientific explanation. In the sense that we can't explain it, not that it's impossible under science altogether - only our current understanding.

Not so sure I'd call number 2 a miracle, winning the lottery is certainly within the odds that it would happen and really not that extraordinary.

According the great psychologist Carl Jung, UFO's occur in three ways: in dreams, in paintings and as rumors. This is a case where UFO's occur as a rumor.

Please see post number 66 regarding UFO's. It would appear Carl Jung isn't so great as they most certainly do occur in everyday life - not just dreams, paintings and rumours. The weird black dot I saw floating across the sky earlier was a UFO (turned out to be a dude on a parachute).

 

[GODISMYSHADOW]

Number 1 should be defies scientific explanation. In the sense that we can't explain it, not that it's impossible under science altogether - only our current understanding.

Do you mean there are no true miracles but only the unexplained?

 

[JaredJames]

Do you mean there are no true miracles but only the unexplained?

Correct.

Just because we can't explain it, doesn't mean it can't be explained.

There is exactly zero evidence for the supernatural, so why would I entertain it?

There are a great many things we don't understand. That doesn't make them supernatural.

 

[nismaratwork]

Do you mean there are no true miracles but only the unexplained?

OK, let me just hold you up here: just read the guidelines for the forum, please. If you're expecting people to do anything except challenge you to prove something as extreme as miracles, you need proof beyond anything seen so far.

Beyond that, jarednjames said it all.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

This may not be the best source but it tells the basic story.


http://fatima.ie/

If in fact some large percentage of the 70,000 actual observed what they say, and if the reports are fairly consistent, then there is only one explanation that would be consistent with science and the reported facts: What they saw was not the sun.

Russ, thanks for mentioning it. It is ironic that as an ex-Catholic, it never occurred to me to start a thread about this.

This is something to be skeptical about, let me start off by saying I think it's not true because well let's be honest it's probably not but I can't say for sure that it's not because the evidence it presents is to much for me to wave away.



Also, I would like to state that it's definately NOT a fact that they saw what they say they saw.

I had never saw this before and upon doing some reading, the conclusion is pretty obvious

http://sacredsites.com/europe/portugal/fatima.html

Apparently the spirits were only visible to the three children at first, then people all showed up. It says some of them thought they saw the sun dancing, many of them said they felt the ground shaking beneath their feet.

Although the sun was behind the clouds they still saw this( they may have or may have not ) but it wasn't actually their

It's not likely that all their stories don't correlate and as we all know journalism is too often and too few times accurate.

Read Lord of the Flies the part where they kill Simon, that's kinda how people lose there minds for a few seconds. Although, I suspect some of the people were just downright lying which I don't doubt because religion is involved.

 

[Phrak]

I have never been to a mass hysteria. Has anyone here attended one, and if so, can you describe it?

 

[nismaratwork]

I have never been to a mass hysteria. Has anyone here attended one, and if so, can you describe it?

Ever been to a rowdy concert?... the mindset is there, just not the right circumstances. If you've ever been near a riot or mob, or the point at which a group of individuals turns into a mob, again... very similar.

Beyond that, having never been there afaik (hope not!), the above would be my best guess based on how the nucleus accumbens (NAcc) works, and people.

 

[JaredJames]

Well, as nismar said, ever been to a concert (perhaps something with multiple artists)?

People may complain about one artists music, but during a concert may just get 'taken' with the atmosphere of the crowd and will tell you they enjoyed the whole night including that artist - even though they hate their music.

I know it's not quite the same, but it's the effect crowds can have on people. People get carried away.

 

[Evo]

The Salem witch trials are a famous case of people pretending to experience something and others starting to see and hear things.

Mass hysteria created from the famous reading of "War of the Worlds".

Here are some cases of mass hysteria. http://listverse.com/2009/03/16/top-10-bizarre-cases-of-mass-hysteria/

 

[nismaratwork]

I agree with Jared and Evo... the difference between a crowd in that's acting in concert, and a mob is just a spark. There is a very similar thing which occurs in mass hysteria, which actually makes a great deal of sense.

If everyone else around you suddenly cues into food, or something dangerous it's an obvious benefit to have a part of your brain that 'listens' to that, and puts you a little more in lockstep. Unfortunately, everyone has a wealth of emotion, and that also seems to be something that the NAcc really rides.

In a very real way, although for obvious reasons it's tough to stick a mob in an MRI, it's becoming clear that mass-anything is just part of the human condition. We're BUILT to not make the same dumb mistakes we see our comrades make, but the downside is what people often term "group think". This is a much more literal version, in which it seems the mood... the 'tenor' if you will, of a group spreads ahead of verbal communication.

I'd add, you don't need EVERYONE to really be "hysterical"... some will lie to be part of it (who wants to be the one who DIDN'T see the miracle? lol), and MOST are simply not interviewed. 70,000 people... I haven't seen anything like evidence that they ALL saw this, but rather descriptions from a handful.

 

[Phrak]

Anyone have any personal evidence of mass hallucination?

I avoid crowds so the closest I've come is watching John Edward con an audience on television if that counts as mass hallucination.

 

[nismaratwork]

Anyone have any personal evidence of mass hallucination?

I avoid crowds so the closest I've come is watching John Edward con an audience on television if that counts as mass hallucination.

From what has been released about the length of those tapings, I don't think you ever have that effect. I was in a riot in Cyprus once, or rather, I was walking briskly away from once that began to form... there is a visceral effect when you're near a mob or mass. It didn't scramble my noggin and have me chanting slogans, but there's no other way to say it; you FEEL the crowd, you feel it "go bad".

It's probably a combination of sound, and body language, both obvious and subliminally (not in the vodoun sense), and the reaction of our NAcc. That's being COMPLETELY uninvolved and with no stake in what was going on... just a bystander.

Still, that's not mass hysteria even if there are similar mechanisms... I would love to hear an objective experience where it's observed in "nature" rather than induced in the lab.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

Anyone have any personal evidence of mass hallucination?

I avoid crowds so the closest I've come is watching John Edward con an audience on television if that counts as mass hallucination.

If everyone reported the exact same thing, and the sun was clearly visible and people didn't feel earthquakes that never happened. I would agree because it's highly unlikely that a story where everyone sees the EXACT same thing didn't happen would be false. Of course that wouldn't happen though because this is pure nonsense, of fairy tales and hoaxes. I can't believe we're getting caught up on debunking whether a few religious junkies lied or didn't lie about an event when the answer is so very obvious

 

[JaredJames]

I can't believe we're getting caught up on debunking whether a few religious junkies lied or didn't lie about an event when the answer is so very obvious

Is there a need for this attitude? It's an interesting topic to read through and I personally have learned a few things skimming through it. I don't see a problem with us discussing it.

 

[SpeedOfDark]

Is there a need for this attitude? It's an interesting topic to read through and I personally have learned a few things skimming through it. I don't see a problem with us discussing it.

There's no probablem with discussing it, but it just seems like things that real science just doesn't agree with is always pawned off and acted like it is agree'd with or doesn't disagree with science when the fact is it does.There's so many really good topics to be skeptical about that scientists and people really aren't sure about. Instead though we always seem to get caught up debating ridiculous claims and very rarely if ever does anyone post proof to back up these claims. If we just discuss things and attempt to be skeptical and debunk them but we never say just say " There's no evidence for this and none that is overwhelming or significant and it just can't be proven therefore it is false" then we're not being true skeptics.Look at the list Ivan posted for credible anomalies most of those things are highly accepted fact in the scientific community or are an underlying mystery which has a good deal of evidence( to much to be dismissed on it's side.) Now look at the stuff we're debating.

 

[JaredJames]

We've already proclaimed this as false. We do this quite a lot. In fact, when it comes to this particular sub-forum we do it in almost every thread made.

 

[nismaratwork]

We've already proclaimed this as false. We does this quite a lot. In fact, when it comes to this particular sub-forum we do it in almost every thread made.

So true... usually it comes down to people railing at us all for being unbelievers, or in the more common case, pure cynics. This is... kind of refreshing.

SpeedOfDark: Do I think you're right? Yeah. Do I think you're right because of how you've approached this, or the ability to explain in depth WHY you're right... NO.

You need to be able to do more than shout back at people, and the reality is that skepticism and Skepticism cannot be Cynicism or it becomes another religion. Let me put this challenge to you: a quick run through memory lane provides me with a poll that (I think) had some disturbing majority of the US population believing in angels. I don't believe in angels, and I'm guessing that you don't either, so we don't need to convince one another.

We also don't need to really get into it with people who BELIEVE in angels, but don't believe in "angels in everyday life". That goes back to their personal religious beliefs, and there is little profit in discussing those unless you want to learn, not teach. So, since the whole point of this is to address extraordinary claims and meet them with consummate evidence, you could just argue that there's no evidence.

Now, you've just built PAGES of retreading old ground into your argument, and it's still not a discussion. Remember, this isn't about convincing anyone, but about exploring the topics that for the general public range from a given that they do or don't exist, and in what forms. Might it be better to start by asking, "What did the angel you saw looked like? When did you see it? Where? Under what circumstances?" There's never a reason, unless it's crackpots intentionally trying to slip under the radar (we saw that here, and is it there anymore? Nope) to flat-out slap someone in the face so to speak. Questions and answers are all someone NEEDS to interrogate, to question, and to explore.

It's also completely OK to not take this on yourself... I get into trouble most often when I stick with a losing fight of mine, or a losing fight of someone else for too long. That always become terse, bitter, and sometimes rude or angry. Where you have insight and experience, this is a GREAT place to share it, but if you're just chiming in... why? I'd trust the mentors here to be hostile to nothing as much as crackpots and people trying to manipulate this forum and especially sub-forum to make a case, not explore it.

 

[JaredJames]

Just to add to nismar, it's often better to ask questions and 'interrogate' people than to simply say "load of rubbish".

To say "there's no evidence you're wrong", may be a strong point but for those who believe it doesn't work - they think they have evidence.

So, when you question and discuss, you gain a better insight and more often than not you can pick holes in their stories / arguments without much effort. And as per a few previous posts here, the so called 'miracle' can be attributed to no more than ordinary medical complaints.

By taking the time to do this, you build a much stronger ground to refute the claims.

 

[anastasia2657]

Seventy thousand people may have been there (frankly, I do not know who was counting), but seventy thousand people did not see something, or even when they saw something, they did not see the same thing. Firstly, by the time they compiled the evidence, many witnesses were lost, according to the members of the canonical committee who investigated the matter, so we do not know how many witnesses there were in fact who signed affidavits or statements. Secondly, if you read the accounts of the witnesses, you will see all kinds of troublesome things in the quotations. For example, one person was recorded to have said to the person standing next to him, "Did you see anything?" Now, this kind of question should not be made to a person standing next to you, if you have seen something that was plainly there to be seen by everyone, and if the sun is coming down from the sky, that is something that everyone would see, so the question is hardly the question that would be asked of the person standing next to you. Secondly, there are many people who did not see anything. But we do not know how many, do we? As a matter of fact, there were photographers there with their cameras, but not one picture of this phenomena was taken. But if you look at the photo of the people who were supposed to be seeing something, you will not see startled looks or people throwing themselves down on the ground. As a matter of fact, you will see countenances that do not appear to be seeing much of anything, just people calming looking up, sometimes with their hands acting as a shield above their eyes. People who did see something, give accounts that are various. In other words, people who saw something were seeing different things. But if a true miracle is occurring then it should be there for everyone to see. The sun was supposed to act queerly on the "serra" in this area of Portugal all the time.. People were staring up into a very bright sun that had come out from behind clouds and shone very brightly. This would have affected people's eyes. Have you ever looked directly into the sun. My mother always warned me not to. But these people were staring straight up into the sun.

 

[FlexGunship]

Seventy thousand people [...] were staring straight up into the sun.

Good post, welcome to the forums, what's your favorite fish, etc...

I edited your post in my quote to provide a nice finishing statement for this thread:

1. They were gullible enough to stare at the sun (expecting something amaing to happen), and
2. anything they saw is suspect because of severe retinal damage.