By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Vertigo-X said:
Badassbab said:
Vertigo-X said:
Badassbab said:
Vertigo-X said:
 


Paltry?

 

*facepalms*

What? What's wrong with the world paltry? Or do you mean it's not paltry but rather significant?


Nothing wrong with the word itself, I just don't know what you're expecting with giving a number of miracles. The implication of the word miracle is that there aren't too many of them. Paltry is what it's 'supposed' to be.

That's the point I'm trying to make. 80,000 approx people go to Lourdes every year to be healed and cured and the RCC (as opposed to say a body of medical professionals) have recognised only a few cases of success. In fact the success rate is so minute it's something like 0.0000335 if we take the 200 million visitors since 1860 and 67 cases of 'miracles'. Statiscally speaking that's meaningless. In fact the miracles are suspect to begin with and if anything visitors are more likely to catch something from the water than be healed by it such is the number of people that drink and bathe in it.

A miracle isn't something you can summon at will. So, are you trying to say that having so few miracles for so many people means that, statistically, miracles don't exist? I'm really not grasping where it is you're going with this.

I was just trying to point out relying on religious faith to improve one's well being is pointless. There's no real proof it works. If anything it's harmful since one might reject real world solutions.