NASA Examines Our Lady of Guadalupe

Status
Not open for further replies.
bearer_of_truth

bearer_of_truth

Registered Senior Member
Please don't post credulous nonsense as if it were fact.
Our Lady of Guadalupe

dMG4EnG.jpg


It is said that this image miraculously appeared on fabric December 12, 1531.

NASA has discovered of Our Lady of Guadalupe to be living.

"The space agency NASA (USA) published the results of research made over the icon Our Lady of Guadalupe."

"Sensational was the fact that analysis of opthalmologic eye reduction Mary showed pupil at the approach of light and the expansion at it's disposal as it happens with the eyes of the living person."

"Also, researchers found that tissue temperature, which depicted an image, meets healthy human body temperature - 36.6 degrees."
"When listening to the body Mary stethoscope, the researchers found a significant heart rate of 115 beats per minute, which corresponds to the baby's heartbeat which is in the womb."

source:

http://tsn.ua/nauka_it/nasa-znayshlo-zhivu-ikonu-materi-bozhoyi-z-temperaturoyu-tila-lyudini.html
 
This claim is sheer drivel.
It dates back at least nine years yet not one single website gives any link to such a study.
Why would NASA (a space agency) conduct that study?
Wiki states that "Neither the fabric ("the support") nor the image (together, "the tilma") has been analyzed using the full range of resources now available to museum conservationists".
The last (of 4) partial studies was performed in 2002. The only mention of NASA is for a study (again partial) done in 1979 by a NASA consultant (infrared imaging specialist) - and he made no such claims as given in the OP (he published his findings in 1981).
It should also be noted that NASA's own website has no mention whatsoever of a study and that a search for "Guadalupe" provides mention of only the island - not even a sniff of "Our Lady of".
As for "miraculously appeared" that's sort of shot down by the2002 study which showed "that the image is merely a native artist’s painting".
In short the entire thing appears to a complete fabrication fostered for, and by, the credulous and gullible.
 
Dywyddyr said:
This claim is sheer drivel.
It dates back at least nine years yet not one single website gives any link to such a study.
Why would NASA (a space agency) conduct that study?
Wiki states that "Neither the fabric ("the support") nor the image (together, "the tilma") has been analyzed using the full range of resources now available to museum conservationists".
The last (of 4) partial studies was performed in 2002. The only mention of NASA is for a study (again partial) done in 1979 by a NASA consultant (infrared imaging specialist) - and he made no such claims as given in the OP (he published his findings in 1981).
It should also be noted that NASA's own website has no mention whatsoever of a study and that a search for "Guadalupe" provides mention of only the island - not even a sniff of "Our Lady of".
As for "miraculously appeared" that's sort of shot down by the2002 study which showed "that the image is merely a native artist’s painting".
In short the entire thing appears to a complete fabrication fostered for, and by, the credulous and gullible.
Click to expand...
The NASA findings are quoted by TCH OPAMAC, a News Website from the Ukraine.

Anyone including myself can write in and change Wiki. It is not a reliable source.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
The NASA findings are quoted by TCH OPAMAC, a News Website from the Ukraine.
Click to expand...
This is incorrect.
That site published what is CLAIMED to be NASA findings - there is no link to (or even for) any NASA report whatsoever.

Anyone including myself can write in and change Wiki.
Click to expand...
And if you post drivel on Wiki it will get corrected.

It is not a reliable source.
Click to expand...
In point of fact Wiki has been shown to be at least as reliable (on scientific subjects[1]) as Encyclopaedia Britannica.

But I am intrigued: what, specifically, leads you to think that the website you quoted and linked is in any way reliable?
I suspect that the sole reason is that it "confirms" a belief you hold.

1 Apparently they fall down on pop culture.
 
bearer_of_truth said:
The News Site is a credible link releasing the NASA findings word for word.
Click to expand...
No, they made it up. NASA never said that. To paraphrase John Cleese:

It's not credible! It's completely made up. This finding has never been! This report is completely fact-free! The author is mendacious, two-timing, duplicitous, perfidious and untruthful! His post contains not a whit, tittle, piece, scrap, shred, crumb, grain, particle, morsel, soupcon or smidgen of actual reality-based content! Bereft of facts, it stands empty! This is a NON-FINDING!
 
bearer_of_truth said:
The News Site is a credible link releasing the NASA findings word for word.
Click to expand...
1) Why do you think that the site is credible?
2) There is no link to the purported NASA study.
3) Why do you think that they've reported "the NASA findings word for word"? Have you seen that report? (Or have you simply made it up that "word for word" is the case?)
4) Why would NASA do such an investigation?
5) If NASA had done such a study why is not mentioned at all on their website? Or any other site except for cranks sites and those with a religious agenda to push? (And why do those sites also not give a link to the claimed study?).

In short, again, your claim about "word for word" is not only unsubstantiated it appears to be entirely false.
Which prompts the question: why are you lying?
 
bearer_of_truth said:
The News Site is a credible link releasing the NASA findings word for word.
Click to expand...
Unless you provide a link to the actual report, not just conclusions, I can't know if the conclusions are based on fact. This is a classic example of the argument from authority fallacy. No one should believe something just because someone who worked for NASA said it. No one believes any scientist just because they said it. Conclusions must be backed by data.



Translation of your website below. It mentions the report, and that it was published, but they don't list the author, title or publication where it was published.



The space agency NASA (USA) published the results of research made over the icon of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Sensational was the fact that the analysis of ophthalmologic eye reduction Mary showed pupil at the approach of light and expansion at its disposal as it happens with the eyes of a living person.

Also, researchers found that tissue temperature, which depicted an image, meets healthy human body temperature - 36.6 degrees.

Read: NASA found in space "Christmas Angel" (photo)

When listening to the body of Mary stethoscope, the researchers found a significant heart rate of 115 beats per minute, which corresponds to the baby's heartbeat, which is in the womb.

According to research experts from NASA, paint, which was painted icon ever found on Earth.

A case where the early twentieth century, along with the icon of Mary planted a bomb, destructive power which has a large radius. However, when the explosion occurred, everything was destroyed, but the icon has remained whole and intact.

It is interesting and what scholars note that the hand of the Virgin Mary have small differences: lighter right and the left darker, which can mean unity between races.

At the time NASA researchers continue to study the icon of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
 
The only possible NASA involvement comes from a Philip Callahan, on the wikipedia page:
Callahan, Philip: "The Tilma Under Infra-Red Radiation", CARA Studies in Popular Devotion, Vol. II, Guadalupan Studies, No. III (March 1981, 45pp.), Washington, D.C.


Here is a link to a Phil Callahan of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory:
http://radar.jpl.nasa.gov/people/index.cfm?FuseAction=ShowPerson&pplID=81

I wonder if they are the same person.
There's even a phone number.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top