(September 13, 2017 at 6:05 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(September 13, 2017 at 5:22 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: Example?
Dis you not just draw the conclusion that Branham was a stage hypnotist a few pages back? Don't know how you got that based off an audio recording...
(September 13, 2017 at 5:29 pm)Crossless2.0 Wrote: You know, crazy shit like saying an apparent light flare in a photograph might have a perfectly mundane explanation involving light rather than the obviously sensible explanation that the power of the Holy Spirit was captured on film.
Sigh, why do you guys insist on ONLY focusing on ONE piece of evidence?
I not only submitted a picture, I also submitted eye witness testimony AND audio recordings. If you want to explain away the light in the picture as just a 'flare', how do you explain the audio recording stating a "light" was present and testimony of someone stating they seen the light with their own eyes?
I responded to those comments, and as of now still waiting for your response. Also, would you mind answering the question I asked you about Carl Sagan?
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.
