Why god cannot heal amputees? Well... he did, once.

[Minimalist]

Who says it was their hoax? They are as willing to believe as any peasant in the field. They declared it a miracle. That's all they needed. It isn't as if they made the guy a saint or anything.

[Walking Void]

If at the time god was actually a man who invented a prosthetic, maybe I would not doubt the validity shown here.

[smax]

Spain 1637

Smack dab in the middle of the Spanish Inquisition.

LOL.

[little_monkey]

How can anyone trust anything Spanish!?!

[Walking Void]

My grandfather is Spanish, I trust the guy.

[Doubting Thomas]

I was interested until I saw the date 1637. No cameras, no living eyewitnesses = didn't happen.

[Angrboda]

An article at skeptoid has an alternative explanation. ()

One key detail they note is that there is no testimony of anyone having examined the amputated leg to confirm that it was gone. There is no record of him being seen at the hospital at Zaragoza where the leg was supposedly amputated, and the amputated leg itself which was supposedly buried is not in the cemetery where it was supposedly buried.

Skeptoid's alternative explanation is that during his 50 day convalescence with a broken leg, he was forced into begging to earn what money he could. Towards the end of his convalescence, he realized that if a broken leg evoked sympathy and money while he was begging, a fact which wouldn't last forever, then a missing leg would be even better. So he left the town where people knew him and headed out for a strange town (Zaragoza), and, binding the one calve behind his thigh, made a living as a one-legged beggar. Of course, he wouldn't sleep with his leg bound up this way, thus explaining why the existence of his supposedly missing leg was discovered while he was sleeping and by a third party.

Do we know that this is what happened? No. We can't confirm the alternative story, but it is fully consistent with the evidence, and seems more plausible. This is a fact which the religious repeatedly fail to take into account when judging the likelihood of a miracle: people lie and make up stories. And not just under extreme circumstances; they do it all the time. So given that fact, the question is how likely is it that event X occurred relative to the probability of lying or invention, not just how improbable is the event relative to natural occurrences. The probability of dishonesty or confabulation, if consistent with the evidence, is always going to be greater, which means that, unless you can rule it out with concrete evidence, that explanation is always to be preferred.

(ETA: Note also that the weakened condition of the leg after discovery is consistent with the atrophy and other effects of living with a leg bound to one's thigh in that manner.)

[Gilgamesh]

You only heal amputees once.

[TheBigOhMan]

An article at skeptoid has an alternative explanation. ()

One key detail they note is that there is no testimony of anyone having examined the amputated leg to confirm that it was gone. There is no record of him being seen at the hospital at Zaragoza where the leg was supposedly amputated, and the amputated leg itself which was supposedly buried is not in the cemetery where it was supposedly buried.

Skeptoid's alternative explanation is that during his 50 day convalescence with a broken leg, he was forced into begging to earn what money he could. Towards the end of his convalescence, he realized that if a broken leg evoked sympathy and money while he was begging, a fact which wouldn't last forever, then a missing leg would be even better. So he left the town where people knew him and headed out for a strange town (Zaragoza), and, binding the one calve behind his thigh, made a living as a one-legged beggar. Of course, he wouldn't sleep with his leg bound up this way, thus explaining why the existence of his supposedly missing leg was discovered while he was sleeping and by a third party.

Do we know that this is what happened? No. We can't confirm the alternative story, but it is fully consistent with the evidence, and seems more plausible. This is a fact which the religious repeatedly fail to take into account when judging the likelihood of a miracle: people lie and make up stories. And not just under extreme circumstances; they do it all the time. So given that fact, the question is how likely is it that event X occurred relative to the probability of lying or invention, not just how improbable is the event relative to natural occurrences. The probability of dishonesty or confabulation, if consistent with the evidence, is always going to be greater, which means that, unless you can rule it out with concrete evidence, that explanation is always to be preferred.

I actually posted in the Introductory Post the reply from skeptoid, and I think I covered well his objections (primary, that there was no testimony of anyone to confirm the leg was gone). The fact is that there was testimony of this. Three of the three doctors who cutted the leg declared, including a nursey and a mancebo ( though this ones, that are the helpers, merely claimed that Pellicer "seemed" to be the same. On the other hand, the doctors, specially Estanga who knew him for two subsequenty years, were sure about the identity of the dude ). I put the pages and the declarations translated in english.

Personally, I doubt the miracle indeed happened, though what I find most strange is the fact that the evolution of the leg that was suposedly "regrown", resembles that of someone who have the leg re-implanted in modern days and the fact that the miracle wasn't faked as an expect miracle in those days ( the leg apeared more short, with low mobility and blue/purple. People those days expected a fully, perfect grown leg in resemblance to God miracles ). It could be a coincidence, but I currently don't know what to believe.

[Angrboda]

I actually posted in the Introductory Post the reply from skeptoid, and I think I covered well his objections (primary, that there was no testimony of anyone to confirm the leg was gone). The fact is that there was testimony of this. Three of the three doctors who cutted the leg declared, including a nursey and a mancebo ( though this ones, that are the helpers, merely claimed that Pellicer "seemed" to be the same. On the other hand, the doctors, specially Estanga who knew him for two subsequenty years, were sure about the identity of the dude ). I put the pages and the declarations translated in english.

Note that the testimony is all given after two years of knowing Pellicer as a beggar.

From the comments below the skeptoid article:

I have read the process, and the case is slightly more complex. The doctors at Zaragoza, Juan de Estanga, Diego Millaruelo and Miguel Beltrán did declare, and confirmed they had decided to cut the leg, which was phlegmous and damaged.But they did not operate themselves, the work was done by their assistants ("mancebos"). Those also declared, with Juan Lorenzo García, the one who later buried the leg confirming the history. The leg was, by the way, buried in a communal grave, so it makes sense that it was never recovered. The weak point of this testimonies is that they also declared that they got to know Pellicer after the fact, when he was a famous one legged beggar, and could not be totally sure he was the amputee. So we know for sure someone was amputated around that time, but that must not have been uncommon in XVII century Spain.

I said famous beggar, and apparently Pellicer became something of a minor celebrity. He had his spot in front of the cathedral and used to show his leg and let people touch the scar. He also used to rub the oils of the cathedral on it, something that irked Juan de Estanga to no end. The doctor [ Juan de Estanga ] seems to have seen the beggar from time to time, but he was not allowed to touch the scar. It is not implausible that Pellicer was faking it, with the weakened leg hidden behind his body.

Some time later, a priest from Calanda, his hometown, locates him and advices him to go back to his parents. He had run out of home to work with an uncle years ago...

Leirus, Madrid
March 26, 2012 6:20pm