I know, Is Mise.

<<no one asked you to [provide evidence]>>

I was simply explaining why your thinking was fallacious.

<<… they do [provide evidence for their miraculous healing], to the best of their ability, by subjecting such claims to rigorous examination by medical experts>>

Miracles, by their very definition, cannot be empirically verified.

<<I didn't ask for a negative to be proved …>>

You expect evidence to the contrary without first having evidence in the affirmative. Same thing.

<<… only that you give a reference to some reliable refutation>>

What part of the burden of proof do you not understand? Nevertheless, I have provided a rational explanation - the placebo effect - and cited the lack of amputees being miraculously healed as an observation that is consistent with this. Another common explanation is the supposedly-healed person not actually having suffered from what they thought they were suffering from.

<<… surely when a claim is made then someone can examine the evidence and disprove the claim …>>

They can. But if the person making the claim believes it only because no one can disprove it, then their thinking is fallacious. I don’t understand why this is so difficult for you.

<<… especially if a group of medicos claims that they cannot explain a cure then others versed in the science of medicine could come forward and disprove them.>>

No, the absence of an explanation is not evidence of a miracle. You are committing the Argument from Ignorance fallacy again.

<<So far it seems that none of the miraculous claims have been disproved.>>

And how would one do that, pray tell?

<<The opinions of doctors are often challenged in our courts, why cannot the opinions of the 40 or so medical people who make up the committee on claimed Lourdes cures be challenged?>>

It’s not that they can’t be challenged, it’s that they don’t have to be until evidence in the affirmative is produced. The default position for any given claim is always disbelief. I suggest you read up on what the burden of proof is.

". In fact, on the contrary, the evidence suggests that people who are indoctrinated into a religion from an early age are less able to distinguish fantasy from reality"

Jews are renowned as musicians, comedians and scientists , possibly due to fantasy / abstract thought and spiritual elements. " You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist. … I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being,” the scientist (Einstein) wrote, AP reported.

Abraham Darby in UK was the father of steel technology and a Quaker.
Isaac Newton scribbled with numbers and wrote about the maths of the trinity doctrine as a believer.
Some Yanks believe and invent stuff.

Well IS MISE I was wrong again, I didn't even get the names of the right kids right.

It goes to show, if I we to act like a good little police-person, I would've first consulted the Worlds greatest known Illuminati, one ever to likely grace us with his earthly presence, and the current lightweight boring champion of sunny Queensland - the ubiquitous...A.J.PHILIPS - Don't tell us your vast knowledge extends beyond that of Roman Catholicism as well, surely not ? Old Pope 'whats his name' won't be very pleased, I'm sure ? Well bugger me !

Aj,

"....Another common explanation is the supposedly-healed person not actually having suffered from what they thought they were suffering from...."

Then one would think that, from the evidence presented to the Committee it would be easy to prove that the contention, above, is correct.
Surely some medical expert or three could easily disprove the claims.

Take the case of "John Traynor (b. 1883 – d. 1943) was a Royal Marine severely wounded during the First World War. He lived as an invalid until 1923, when he joined with fellow Catholics from the Liverpool area and journeyed to the Catholic shrines at Lourdes."....He was wounded near Bruges on 8 October 1914, but recovered. He was hit by machine gun fire on May 8, 1915 while participating in a bayonet charge in the Gallipoli Campaign, losing the use of his right arm and beginning to suffer from epilepsy, and was discharged with an 80% pension.
In April 1920, a surgeon in Liverpool attempted to cure the epilepsy by trepanning, an operation that was reported to have resulted in the partial paralysis of both legs.
In 1923 he traveled to Lourdes with a group of pilgrims from Liverpool, dipping in the baths nine times. While there he is said to have been cured.

To cut a long story short Jack Traynor was completely cured and led a vigorous life, including having a few more children.
http://www.faithandfamily.org.uk/publications/jack_traynor.htm

His case is not considered to be a miracle by the Church, nor was it considered to be one by the British Government which continued to pay him a 100% Diability pension even though he could and did heft sacks of coal in his business as a coal merchant; still being paid the pension is the real miracle, it wouldn't happen under Centerlink!!

AJ claims not to believe in miracles and yet holds to the idiotic unscientific fantasy of the big bang. Quite hilarous really. Can't see the irony of his own delusion.

nicknamenick,

LSD has also given us some of the greatest music over the last 50 years. That doesn't mean it's good for you.

--

o sung wu,

Do you have anything relevant to say in response to anything I’ve written on this thread, or are you just trolling again? Your obsession with me is unhealthy. You need to seek help for that Borderline Personality Disorder of yours.

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/personality-disorders/borderline-personality-disorder.htm

Beyondblue support service 24 hours: 1300 22 4636

--

Is Mise,

You’re assuming that it hasn’t been.

<<Then one would think that, from the evidence presented to the Committee it would be easy to prove that the contention, above, is correct.>>

How many of these delusional people submit themselves to be subjects of a controlled experiment? None, I bet. Funny that.

<<Surely some medical expert or three could easily disprove the claims.>>

Provided there was a controlled experiment, yes, sometimes. But why would they bother? The burden of proof still rests with those making the fantastical claims.

<<Take the case of "John Traynor …>>

As far as I know, this guy was a classic example of precisely what I was saying. We have no access to any records verifying the truth of his story. It should come as no surprise that we never see any of these supposed miracles firsthand too, and that even those who supposedly witness trivial miracle healings see the less-significant miracle healings. They’ve only ever been told about the the more amazing healings.

--

And runner,

My angry little friend. Perhaps you could tell us why your god never heals amputees? Or why he insists on playing silly buggers with trivial supposed healings that only ever seem to happen in evangelical churches instead of - oh, I don’t know - feeding millions of starving people?

*Crickets chirping*