The undeniable miracle at Fatima

[vorlon13]

Going back 30+ years now, best beer for me was St. Pauli Girl.

I rarely drank it, however, as I was a cheap drunk.

I have VERY few souvenirs from my drinking days, but there might be a few SPG bottle caps tucked away somewhere . . . . .

[downbeatplumb]

Perform an exorcism

Rituale Romanum?

Or Mr Motivator?

I used to have a Mr Motivator video,

[Astonished]

Found the PDF of the Book, "Meet the Witnesses". Enjoy - especially the part about the atheists who became believers - you should love that part. I can just picture you guys having temper tantrums on the floor after reading this -- that is if you even dare to open it. Next you'll probably attack the author, or tell us the book was never written and was completely fabricated by someone. Keep dreaming guys.

http://johnhaffert.org/wp-content/upload...-91511.pdf


And whoever asks for "more testimonials" - give me a break, like that is going to matter. If I gave you 10, you would ask for 20. If I gave you 100, you would say that's not good enough and that you need 200. I'm not wasting my time jumping through hoops for you. The book has plenty to get the point across. One way or the other I'm sure you will find a way to disregard the entire book so you can remain ticked off at the world.

First off, no one gives a fuck if atheists become converts. Atheism says fuck-all about how skeptical or critical a thinker a person is. We're only interested in things when they go the other way. If we statistically lose someone who still believes in woo, then they're not a rational skeptic, the only population demographic I actually take pride in being lumped in with.

Second, no one with functioning cognitive faculties wants to read a book written by a dyed-in-the-wool cockbiter who wants to make money selling shit to gullible diptards like yourself. Anyone legitimately trying to reveal the truth would make a free youtube video and present clear, compelling evidence. The contrary nature of how this case is being made and profited from is all the proof you need that this is nothing more than a charlatan. You're the one who's got the problem if you aren't able to figure out that very simple thing. If someone was bored enough to actually read it, and there was anything of substance therein, they could then turn around and present it as evidence that would be convincing to us because they'd know what kind of thing would convince us since they'd be of a similar mindset. No one has done this (and I'm sure, if only for review purposes, at least one rational skeptic had to trudge through that tome of used toilet paper). That either means they feel that it should be kept a secret, or there is no evidence whatsoever. Either way, until anything of the sort comes to light, you're the one being irrational, fuckwad.

Third, no one in their right mind would ask for ANY testimonials, let alone MORE testimonials. Know why? What the fuck am I asking, of course you don't. Testimony is BEYOND worthless. In the absence of evidence it's indistinguishable from the 'truth' of someone raving in a padded room as they smear feces all over the walls. It just doesn't cut it as evidence. People lie. People have biases. People have fallible minds that play tricks on them like enabling them to believe the stupid shit that you do.

So, here's your mission, champ: If you've read this book, why don't you present 3 to 5 of the main, total knock-down arguments it makes, and why they are scientifically irrefutable. Unless they're something other than witness testimony by the most biased and agenda-driven people on the planet, no one's buying it. You should have figured that out by now. What impresses you is impressive to toddlers, and that should tell you something.

Ya gotta love the sudden lack of answers after I posted this book. Plenty of vulgarities and insults, but otherwise that deer in the headlights look from everyone. And as I predicted, attacks on the author and his research. That says it all. Newspaper reports: DENIED. Testimonials: DENIED. Research by the Catholic Church: DENIED. Further research by the author: DENIED. Now you can all live with a peaceful conscience right?

Debating with you guys is like shooting fish in a barrel. Actually debates never even get off the ground because all you do is cuss people out when faced with the obvious. And overwhelming the discussion with 50 messages per hour has not helped your position at all - it's a well known tactic that gives you all a false feeling of being in the right. You've lost the battle big time.

It's been fun guys and gals!

Well when you insult our intelligence by feeding us garbage and expecting us to eat it right up, yeah, we're going to call you a fuckass prick and tell you to go eat shit (not the kind you already eat, but someone else's, who had diseases). Show us the research done by unbiased scientists (unbiased meaning, someone who doesn't already believe in what you believe and therefore isn't setting out to prove it one way or another, who wants to legitimately know whether or not it's true; that way you don't get to spin it into something like an 'atheist agenda to hide the truth' like a propaganda-brainwashed little cunt) or don't bother. Otherwise it's all propaganda to further the reach and strengthen the grip of those peddling this bullshit.

And a debate can't happen if the side making the claim has no evidence. Here's how that would go:

"I claim X."
"Prove it."
"I have no evidence of X."
"Then X is not a tenable position to hold."

Why do I feel like I'm explaining this to someone physically older than me, but mentally younger than me?