Guardian angel saves baby

[Pizza]

Becca, It's okay for him to be not inquisitive because faith or something.

[Cyberman]

If I had posted this with the title "Alien saves baby", Drich, what would you have said about me?

[coldwx]

So apparently there is a video of this rescue. I have watched several cuts of it and nowhere do you hear a voice and I also don't hear any first responders talking about "I hear a voice" or "Someone is calling for help". If there is and I am not hearing it or seeing it please correct me.

Page 8 post 72, you stand corrected.

---

Do you remember what I said earlier about thinking through your posts before you press post reply? The video I was speaking of is officer body cam video that was just released. The post you made on page 8, #72 references an interview. This is not the same video. Are you still going to claim you corrected me?

Now we have a video that clearly shows the moments before the rescue and captures the audio. Excuses in 3, 2, 1,....

[Nope]

Drich, the video you posted only had the interview. I have not watch the video from the rescuers.

It would be wonderful if the love of this baby's mother could have somehow denied even death to make certain her baby was safe. I want it to be true but there is no evidence that it actually happened . If the officers really didn't acknowledge the voice while trying to save the mom, then they must have lied

[IATIA]

If the officers really didn't acknowledge the voice while trying to save the mom, then they must have lied

They may not have lied. Memory is defective in that it is influenced by what we want to remember. There may have been a 'voice-like' sound, catbird or something, and after the fact, memory recalled a human voice calling out. This has been proven in a plethora of experiments. In between the theists and the courts, however, this empirical fact is ignored.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

It's ironice that you want to be known as 'inquisitive' when clearly you have already made up your mind..

And you haven't? The title of this thread... your thread is "Guardian Angel Saves Baby".

[Neo-Scholastic]

It's funny how 'atheists' demand proof of stuff like this and when it has been provided you all avoid it like the plague or as the noob tried to pretend it does not exist.

That's because the so-called free-thinkers are anything but. It is the same situation for NDE''s. The best evidence by the most serious researchers provides compelling proof, but they won't have any of it. There are more than a dozen natural "explanations" for NDEs and they are all inconsistent, speculative, and do not account for all the phenomena. When presented with evidence for something that doesn't fit their small minded box of how the world should work they will accept anything, however speculative, to deny that maybe, just maybe, the world is a little more rational than suggested by materialism. They're indigenous hypocrites at worse and willfully ignorant at best.

[Foxaèr]

It's funny how 'atheists' demand proof of stuff like this and when it has been provided you all avoid it like the plague or as the noob tried to pretend it does not exist.

I could understand if actual evidence had been provided and not that which your deluded mind erronously interprets as evidence.

[Esquilax]

That's because the so-called free-thinkers are anything but. It is the same situation for NDE''s. The best evidence by the most serious researchers provides compelling proof, but they won't have any of it. There are more than a dozen natural "explanations" for NDEs and they are all inconsistent, speculative, and do not account for all the phenomena.

Yeah, and the religious explanation isn't at all inconsistent- funnily enough, NDEs always seem to confirm the religion of the person having them, not some consistent religion- or speculative- you certainly don't have any evidence of an afterlife, making the explanation... speculative- and account for all the phenomena- except for the real ones when NDES are tested and the people experiencing them fail to have any awareness of things they should be, if they had truly left their body.

In the best efforts of researchers has turned up no evidence of an afterlife, or god, or anything like that. You can't turn to the research when (you think) it confirms what you believe- and don't think we missed that you didn't cite any research, you just asserted it was there, as usual- and ignore this entirely pertinent point.

When presented with evidence for something that doesn't fit their small minded box of how the world should work they will accept anything, however speculative, to deny that maybe, just maybe, the world is a little more rational than suggested by materialism. They're indigenous hypocrites at worse and willfully ignorant at best.

Chad, you don't present evidence. You never present evidence. You do just what you've done here, just what I criticized all the theists in this thread for, when you avoid the real conversation that could go on here in favor of fiat assertion and petty, condescending grandstanding.

But you aren't in an intractable asshole contest, you're in a thread discussing the supernatural, and now you're in fact lying, because as I've already pointed out, atheism does not deny the supernatural, we just need more evidence than the rhetorical tricks ("they're just close minded!") you use in place of evidence, in a petty attempt to poison the well rather than provide anything substantial.

The only point you've had from atheists thus far is that aggressive condescension isn't an argument, and literally every theist in here seems incapable of seeing a difference between the two. You're all just embarrassing yourselves, but you're too smugly stuck up your own asses to see it.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

It's funny how 'atheists' demand proof of stuff like this and when it has been provided you all avoid it like the plague or as the noob tried to pretend it does not exist.

That's because the so-called free-thinkers are anything but. It is the same situation for NDE''s. The best evidence by the most serious researchers provides compelling proof, but they won't have any of it. There are more than a dozen natural "explanations" for NDEs and they are all inconsistent, speculative, and do not account for all the phenomena. When presented with evidence for something that doesn't fit their small minded box of how the world should work they will accept anything, however speculative, to deny that maybe, just maybe, the world is a little more rational than suggested by materialism. They're indigenous hypocrites at worse and willfully ignorant at best.

Oh whatever man. Just utter tripe over and over.

Lest we forget that it's the theist contingent who are failing to provide any evidence of critical thinking skills in this thread, as evident to anyone who reads it.

All you've done here is snipe with nonsensical comments about how nobody should ask any questions, just take whatever conclusion that's offered first and accept it. Fucking hell a 6 year old wouldn't settle for that. You don't just say ''and it was an angel and that's proven by a 'voice' that someone may or may not have heard." No evidence, no research, no methodology about how one would even go about testing this claim. Nothing. Just accept it. And the fact that we don't just believe it marks us as closed minded? Yeah, ok mate, in your weird twisted reality maybe.

Another ridiculous thread. I have to remind my self constantly recently that you guys are actually adults who presumably have some semblance of formative understanding of how the world works.