Here, and in most leftist spaces, why does Islam always get a pass?
is it because when people picture “muslim” they picture a POC but when they picture “Christian” they picture a straight white man?
Here, and in most leftist spaces, why does Islam always get a pass?
is it because when people picture “muslim” they picture a POC but when they picture “Christian” they picture a straight white man?
https://nacn-usa.org/wp-content/uploads/Zugibe-scanned-reports-26-3-05-and-15-3-05-RON-ack.pdf
The Eucharistic Miracle of Buenos Aires
Blood type AB Human Cardiac Tissue growing on catholic host that was left to dissolve in water but didn’t
Hearsay, hearsay and more hearsay. There is no proof that the tissue has been in water, but the inspecting physician has been very adamant that tissue being stored in water for YEARS, regardless of distilled or not, cannot show the blood cells in the sample, because they would have been washed out ages ago. This leaves 4 possibilities:
Bring us irrefutable proof (hint: you won’t be able to) that this sample hasn’t been messed with in the years before it landed on that physicians desk.
how can you “mess with” a sample to make LIVING heart tissue appear on it when you are presumably two catholic clergymen with limited resources?
Are you suggesting that they performed a vivisection and took out LIVING heart tissue and preserved it for years and managed to keep the WBCs alive?
By replacing the sample. Hearts aren’t really a rare thing, arent they? The amount of the sample wasn’t really defined, which means even a biopsy sample might suffice - no human sacrifice needed, and it’s an outpatient procedure.
So if I understand, this letter only repeats the claim which was told to the doctor who wrote this letter… Which part proves the claim?
the doctor who wrote this letter was the one who studied the host
Which part of the letter exactly provides the proof that the slide studied by the doctor was grown on “the host” ? The doctor never claims to believe that. He only says he was told by someone that the material on the slide was kept in water for 3 months. All the doctor says about it is that this would be impossible. That’s the opposite of proof.
Think of it this way. I send a burnt rag to a Forensic Fire Investigator. The investigator agrees it was burnt by fire. If the investigator also reports that they were told the rag came from the cage of a fire breathing dragon and the dragon keeper swears there is no other source of fire in the cage, would that be proof that there exists a fire breathing dragon in a cage?
On May 1, 1992, a Eucharistic minister found two pieces of the host on the corporal. The parish priest at the time, Juan Carlomagno, asked him to place them in a container of water inside the tabernacle so that they would dissolve. A week later, on May 8 (the feast day of Our Lady of Luján, the patron saint of Argentina), they noticed drops resembling blood in the container, and that the pieces appeared to have been transformed[1].
On May 10 (the Feast of the Good Shepherd), two priests noticed small spots that looked like blood on the paten and the corporal during Mass[1]. 1994 edit
On July 24, 1994, one of the extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist noticed what appeared to be a drop of blood on the corporal[1]. 1996 edit
On August 15, 1996, the Feast of the Assumption, in the Church of Santa Maria, at the end of the 7:00 p.m. Mass, a parishioner reported to the priest, Father Alejandro Pezet, that she had seen a soiled host[2] at the base of a candle. The priest placed the host in a container of water so that it would dissolve[3],[4].
On August 26, it was observed that the host, instead of dissolving, had turned into a red[4], gelatinous substance. The diocesan curia, represented by the then-auxiliary bishop Jorge Mario Bergoglio, requested that professional photographs be taken, which were taken on September 6[5]. The photographs show, beyond any doubt, an increase in the size of the host[6].
this is the wikipedia summary of events
Nothing in there is “proof.” Just hearsay after hearsay after hearsay.
Learn about the scientific method, and why we have strict protocols for evidence collection.
That is, if you actually care to learn.
Or just reply with something snarky because you don’t actually have an interest in believing true things.
I have a feeling it’s going to be the latter
Because of contamination, yes, but Living Human Cardiac Tissue cannot be from contamination
It’s like talking to a fucking wall. It’s like you didn’t even read what I read, let alone say anything remotely relevant to it.
Don’t pretend like you want to actually know something when in reality you just want an opportunity to spread your hateful irrational religion.
Go away, nobody here wants this shit.
it is you that assumes that I do not want to know just because I do not agree with everything you say
Doo they have proof of this? Or just two dudes word and pinky promise they are telling the truth?
even if it was mishandled, you cannot keep human cardiac tissue ALIVE for YEARS just via contamination and a water container
cardiac tissue cannot grow from contamination via fingertips or tap water unless it is a miracle
Yes i understand that, but do they have proof this is what happened? I could make a side with heart tissue and concoct a story about its origins, that does not make it a miracle.
where would you get the heart tissue and how would you make the WBCs live for 3 years without special training and equipment?
Cadaver
I would lie. I see no proof in the paper you linked that proves a miracle. Just two dudes going trust me bro.
the WBCs were alive, it was analyzed by Dr. Zugibe
a cadaver would have the WBCs dead