(October 15, 2015 at 2:25 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: and yet scientists did not investigate any of examples of miracles in the link that i posted which were all physical observable manifestations.

Which ONE has evidence that has not been investigated to the best ability of science? I'm not going to go through all of them, so chose the best one, please.

(October 15, 2015 at 1:57 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 15, 2015 at 1:44 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: The whole of the nineteenth century. They failed.

people in the 1800's couldn't discover the majority of things that we know about the universe and reality today dont you agree that science and technology has advanced considerably since the 1800's?

Indeed. Ever since they found out that trying  to prove god did anything was futile the world has moved on immeasurably. Whats your point?

(October 15, 2015 at 2:25 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: and yet scientists did not investigate any of examples of miracles in the link that i posted which were all physical observable manifestations.

Marian Apparition in Zeitoun

Quote:Zeitoun, Egypt, 1968-1971

From April 1968 to May 1971, more than 100,000 people reported observing Virgin Mary apparitions above a Coptic Orthodox Church at Zeitoun, Egypt. Witnesses' descriptions varied between two main types: small bright, short-lived lights nicknamed “doves,” and more enduring, less intense, diffuse patches of glowing light (Johnston 1980). Canadian neuropsychologist Michael Persinger of Laurentian University and his American colleague John Derr (1989) analyzed seismic activity in the region from 1958 to 1979, and found an unprecedented peak in earthquakes during 1969. They state that “The 'narrow' window of significant temporal relationship between luminous phenomena and earthquakes is within the classic time frame of more acceptable antecedents (e.g., microseismic activity) of imminent earthquake activity.” It appears that the Marian observers were predisposed by religious background and social expectation to interpreting the light displays as related to the Virgin Mary.

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/mass_delus...illennium/

Incorruptible Corpses

Quote:Over the last 15 years, however, a new view of the Incorruptibles has begun to emerge. At the Vatican's request, Italian pathologists, chemists, and radiologists have been poring over the bodies of the ancient men and women interred in church reliquaries. Charged with gleaning new information about the lives of the saints and assisting in the conservation of sacred remains, they have also brought science to the altars of Europe's cathedrals. Already, they have examined more than two dozen saints and beati, shedding light on the mystery of their preservation.

http://web.archive.org/web/2001061001440...aints.html

Therese Neumann

Quote:Scientists and skeptics do not believe that Neumann performed genuine miracles. According to skeptical investigator Joe Nickell on one occasion Neumann claimed to have healed herself from blindness, but whilst "blind" she was examined and her pupils responded normally to light. Nickell suspected that Neumann's claims were performed by "hysterical hypochondria" or "outright fakery".[13]

By 1928 the church authorities had investigated Neumann's alleged stigmata. A professor who was monitoring her noted that blood would only appear from her wounds when he was asked to leave the room. He reported the behavior as suspicious commenting that something "needed to be hidden from observation."[13]

A psychoanalytic study of Neumann has suggested that her stigmata resulted from post-traumatic stress symptoms expressed in unconscious self-mutilation through abnormal autosuggestibility.[14]

Researcher Ian Wilson found the inedia claims of Neumann suspicious. He noted that "Therese had a vigorous, stocky build throughout most of this time, and all reason tells us that it would be impossible to survive so long without food or drink."[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therese_Neumann

Lourdes
Miracles under the microscope: The investigation of miracle cures represents a curious intersection between medical science and religious doctrine

Padre Pio (St Pio of Pietrelcina)
Padre Pio: Scandals of a Saint

It seems there's no dearth of investigation of miracle claims.

Jenny - You're also (willfully?) ignoring something I have pointed out to you many times before.

I'll bold it so you don't miss it, this time: About one-half of scientists are religious believers of some sort.

So when you say "scientists", and try to imply that they don't believe because they refuse to investigate (and that it's because they don't want to believe), it ignores the fact that every other one out there does believe.

As to your claim that things are not investigated, in addition to the links already provided for you, you should really look into the group called the Committee for the Scientific Investication of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP, for short). They do exactly what you claim no one is willing to do.

http://www.csicop.org/

(October 15, 2015 at 2:14 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(October 15, 2015 at 2:10 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: http://listverse.com/2008/07/14/top-10-a...-miracles/

Oh, dear... Can you chose ONE of those, that's supposed to be convincing? Because that's a lot of crap to go through and if you want - you can find rational explanations for all of those on the internet yourself.

Of course - since you believe in god, I'll bet you never bothered to look. I mean - why try to explain things, if you can just believe in magic and accept them without evidence, right?

why would you find any of them convincing your not open to the possibility that it could be caused by God , what is your explanation for the events im sure you have a rational explanation for all of them already

(October 15, 2015 at 3:27 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: why would you find any of them convincing[...]

I would find any and all of them convincing, if there was credible evidence for them. That's what "open-minded" means.
Show me evidence of god - and I'll believe in that too...

(October 15, 2015 at 2:16 pm)robvalue Wrote: I don't know what people are expecting.

Do they want scientists to go, "Wow, yes this is amazing! We have no good explanation for this, so it's magic! Everyone can make up their own stories about it, and we will endorse them!"

Scientists aren't stopping people making up stories.

how do you know the examples listed were hoaxes they were not proven as hoaxes isnt it just likely you are assuming they are hoaxes because they do not fit into the world view that you have created and to think they are anything other than a hoax would challenge that ?

(October 15, 2015 at 3:27 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:

(October 15, 2015 at 2:14 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote: Oh, dear... Can you chose ONE of those, that's supposed to be convincing? Because that's a lot of crap to go through and if you want - you can find rational explanations for all of those on the internet yourself.

Of course - since you believe in god, I'll bet you never bothered to look. I mean - why try to explain things, if you can just believe in magic and accept them without evidence, right?

why would you find any of them convincing your not open to the possibility that it could be caused by God , what is your explanation for the events im sure you have a rational explanation for all of them already

it's not that we're "not open to the possibility that it could be caused by God", we are unconvinced that any of them are actual miracles.

Anytime any of these are examined with any level of critical scrutiny, the miraculous becomes mundane.  There are more likely natural or other mundane explanations for every single one of them.

I also find it interesting that you didn't list any miracles that are claimed by Hindus or Muslims. Only the ones that support the one out of 1000's of gods you happen to believe in.

(October 15, 2015 at 3:30 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote:

(October 15, 2015 at 3:27 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: why would you find any of them convincing[...]

I would find any and all of them convincing, if there was credible evidence for them. That's what "open-minded" means.
Show me evidence of god - and I'll believe in that too...

what evidence exactly would you believe? what would convince you that God exists ?

(October 15, 2015 at 3:36 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: what evidence would you believe?

That depends on the claim. Generally - the same evidence scientists would believe. Testable. Repeatable. Reliable.

(October 15, 2015 at 3:36 pm)jenny1972 Wrote: what would convince you that God exists ?

Which one of the thousands of gods?