A third grade science textbook would enlighten many here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...statue-of-the-Virgin-Mary-that-weeps-oil.html
It isn't much different than people wanting crop-circles to be true or breathlessly following ghost-hunters. Many people want to be believe that there's something transcendent taking place around them, that they aren't just trapped in the gears of a machine. If a statue is seen to be weeping, would it really matter that the mechanism bringing that about is condensation? It would still appear to be weeping. With human beings, it's glandular secretions supplying the fluid. But that fact doesn't stop our tears from meaning something. That's one of the important differences between "religionists" and others, I guess. Many 'religionists' seem to imagine events in the world around them as being meaningful and symbolic, almost as if they were words communicating something.
Mod note: This post as been flagged as inflammatory. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Well yes it would matter since the miracle of the tearing statue assumes the water is coming from the statue itself and not the air. Shall we say that my cold glass of lemonade is "crying" too just because moisture condenses on its cold outer surface?
Agree. It would do everyone a service to debunk this as soon as possible. This sort of hysterical superstition undermines serious religion in any case. What would be the point of God working a miracle to make statue, in somebody's front room, weep? You will find this sort of credulous nonsense gets no support from church authorities.
I read somewhere that it's quite easy to make a statue weep/bleed if it's made of porous material. You just make small cuts in the glaze where you want the liquid to come out and fill it with some water, dyed red if you like, and it will seep out. Isn't it called capilliarity, or something like that? Not that anyone would do that sort of thing of course.
