scientifically inexplicable things occur that are apparently supernatural, but not to atheists

****Continuing from my first round****-‘someone can see with no retinas even though this seems scientifically impossible etc, just to use an example.’ You have mentioned this many times before but my search for this case was futile. I read some explanations from another one of your opponents so I will add my educated guess. There are very few reasons why someone could have no retina, the most probable is by retinal detachment. Ironically, one of the symptoms is a highly diminished vision especially central, but almost never total blindness, as most of the retina falls but very rarely it dies completely. So yeah, with all types of retinal separation, or loss, vision is very rarely completely lost. If I assume all of the retina is lost, many ways of “seeing” exist for the blind, a few are mentioned in the other debate. The blind have been known to use echolocation, like bats or dolphins, and are able to see their environment. I don’t think you were referring to alternate seeing so I won’t go further. -‘here here's another http://usatoday30.usatoday.com......’ Please don’t take this the wrong way, but this case is not even unusual, a common virus with a 50% probability of surviving feels more like a forced reason to classify it for a miracle, especially if one is needed that appears connected to a man that is in the process of beatification. The scientific explanation is definitely given. I remember the death of Pope John Paul II particularly because it fell on my birthday. I’m closer to the kid’s hospital so maybe I made the miracle. My intent is not to disrespect, it is to bring the point that this particular case is not of “scientifically unexplainable” and for it to be classified a miracle it needed a gigantic jump to connect it to a dying Pope halfway around the world. Other events seem a lot more reasonable to argue that they could be miracles. -‘the common objection of atheists and skeptics is that things just happen to occur by probability, that a genetic deviance, or random chance etc has caused it to happen to them. (that's how evolusion occurs, someone with a genetic deviance getting their genes prominent in the population)’ Shows confirmation bias from both sides, as explained before. -‘but I don't see these things happening to atheists. I see plenty of evidence from chrisitans and to a lesser extent other religious folks. but I don't see it from atheists etc, why is that? they might claim that it's just not as newsworthy or interpreted that way given the lack of religious context etc.’ Great example of confirmation bias, when one wants to see miracles, one can see them everywhere on situations that happen identically or very similarly to the rest of the population. For example, if one is a theist and is very poor and hungry and finds a 20 dollars on the floor, he will tend to see it as a miracle. The same situation happens to a theist and he would just consider himself lucky. Further extending this example, to the theist this is worthy of being told and would share the story of his miracle as much as possible. A story like that would never be considered newsworthy. The girl from one of your sources, who is suddenly relieved of pain, also would never appear on the news. There is a high degree of truth to this claim. Out of a religious context, the story is as interesting as someone with a headache taking a Tylenol. So yes, because it is not interesting to an atheist, they will not remember it happened, even though it happens to everyone. -‘but you'd think there's at least be noteworthy evidence, or something, at least, that shows it happens to atheists etc’ To be newsworthy it needs to be sufficiently unique to be interesting. I noticed while I was doing my research that the degree of uniqueness of the articles about miracles was far lower than the events in the mainstream news out of a theist context. A sick newborn gets better VS Stephen Hawking survives 50 years a deadly disease, changes our understanding of black holes all while the only movement he can do is a spasm in his right cheek; a girl is relieved of pain after back surgery with a smile VS man survives and walks 47 story fall where his brother died. There is little doubt this events happens to atheists too, but for you to start seeing them you will probably only notice the very rare events without any religious context. Maybe the man that fell had an angel looking out for him? We can never know. -‘also, even if i acknowledged that they may occur, it would be extremely very small percentage wise. as of now i'd be happy with just couple or a few examples. ive shown some examples happening to theists, it shouldnt be hard to find some happening to atheists.’ If you need atheists to explicitly say that certain events appear as miracles and that they can’t explain them then you are right a percent close to zero is the probability of you seeing them. Experiences in life are known to be very similar between members of a common culture, regardless of beliefs, so yes, they happen equally, if not more to atheists (theists have a tendency by personality to be more conservative and avoid risky situations). Maybe you are the one that is going need to show the atheists around you the miracles they are part of and they can’t see, or just keep quiet and enjoy the moment. Think about it, you are pretty much assuming no special moments can happen to atheists so they are pretty much miserable people? I hope you are more satisfied with my response than with your other debates, and I’m very interested in reading your thoughts. Pseudo-Miracles?: - Dead Woman Wakes After Onset of Rigor Mortis http://www.foxnews.com... - Black and White Twins http://www.dailymail.co.uk... - Teen Lives 118 Days Without a Heart http://www.reuters.com... - Man Holds Own Skull http://news.bbc.co.uk... - Baby Born with Two Rare Conditions Beats 1-in-500 Million Chance http://www.journallive.co.uk... - Comatose Man Wakes After 19 Years in a Coma http://news.bbc.co.uk... Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://en.wikipedia.org... [others I forgot…]****End of Round 1**** Your round 2 was about Gemma di Giorgi so I’ll focus on her and allow you to respond to the rest of my round 1 and two on our last one. I’ll try to be objective about this case, even though it is largely anecdotal and no verifiable proof of how this happened or at least the relevant medical details have been provided. NOTES: -Cured is a giant overstatement, it’s evident from the video, her mannerisms, and even in the anecdote, that she can barely see. Anecdotal evidence is seldom accepted as evidence because they have a tendency to distort over time, especially memories about childhood on a 70+ year old woman. I will assume this anecdote as true and explain why this case is further proof of confirmation bias. I emphasize this debate is about showing situations that can be considered miracles by theists also happen to atheist. The veracity of miracles is irrelevant to this discussion. The pupil is the name of the hole located in the center of the iris of the eye. Interestingly, with diseases in the optical visual pathway, some degree of vision is expected, and rarely lead to total blindness. Medical evaluations are mentioned but I found zero evidence of this. So supposed medical references are rendered null and we are left with the anecdote we assumed as true.I will show some reasoning jumps and conclude next.