[ClearCase_guy]

But you gloss over all kinds of things. Think of Fatima: thousands of people witnessed the miracle. An atheist will say: "Mass hysteria." Think of miraculous medical cures (there are thousands on record). An atheist will say: "The mind has amazing powers, which we do not fully understand."

I could go on and on. For those whose only faith is science, then only scientifically verified data is credible. For those who have religious faith, there are other credible sources. The religious people can see both sides (for example: all Chrisitians recognize chemistry as a an uncontroversial science). But some scientists are close-minded and cannot see the other side: this not does not diminish the fact that there is evidence of supernatural occurences.

Your faith blinds you.

[Jason Kauppinen]

"But you gloss over all kinds of things. Think of Fatima: thousands of people witnessed the miracle. An atheist will say: "Mass hysteria." Think of miraculous medical cures (there are thousands on record). An atheist will say: "The mind has amazing powers, which we do not fully understand.""

No, they would say: 'Hmmm. Well if something like that actually happened it should be able to be reproduced and studied'.

The difference you're glossing over is that scientific data is the result of an observation of events and can be repeated. No faith is required because one can see for oneself if they do not believe the results of the data or trust in the method that was used to collect it.

Miracles cannot, by their very nature, be reproduced by man, and therefore cannot be confirmed scientifically.

This is where faith must enter the picture.