₦airaland Forum

triplechoice:
Ok, let's work with this, even though you didn't do exactly what I asked. The image you uploaded still contains the caption "hand-like shape". That's a giveaway. You're still telling the AI what to find before it looks and it has done exactly that.

And the summary of the response is that it appears like a hand or resemble a hand. But "like a hand or hand-like features" is not " it is a hand".

Notice we don't say the baby's face looks or resembles a face. We say it is a face, because it is clearly visible. If a real hand from outside were in that space, it would image clearly as a hand, the same way the baby's own hand would. Instead, we have a grainy shadow that looks like a hand.

When I was a child, I used to look at the moon and see what looked like a woman carrying a baby on her back. Every child in this part could "see it" due to our cultural upbringing where it is not uncommon for mothers to carry their babies behind them. That didn't make it real. It was a pattern in the lunar surface, a shadow our brains turned into a figure. A child growing up a different environment, like Europe, for instance, would have his or her brain turn the same image into something common in his or her environment, something like a huge rabbit or Father Christmas and it would fit.

The fact that it was a child who first noticed this shape from the story and called it a hand should tell you what we are looking at through the child's eyes: an ambiguous ultrasound artifact that a child's imagination named , not the hand of God, but a shape that looks like one.

Appearance is not reality.

We are not done yet. Ask AI where did the hand-like image come from or what might have caused the image to appear. Ask the question to prove you didn't deliberately crop out that part when you asked ChatGPT . Share the answer for all to read.

I think your allusion to an image on the moon is peculiar to you. I and the many people who grew up together with me have no such experience about the moon. And, honestly, you'll be the first person to be talking about imaginary images seen by children on the moon. But then, if there has been any prior thoughts regarding the moon carefully distilled unto you by your elders, you might have such experience. Your imaginary sightings didn't come from nothing. There was a source- misleading information. There was no such source that could have manipulated anybody's view of the ultrasound image.

My instructions to the AI were clear. I asked it for its own personal view. That means it is to separate its response from anything associated with the image. The different AIs simply explained what they observed. It had nothing to do with whatever the image contained. The reports were based on their personal observations

The hand-like image is distinct. Even the AIs said so. "A distinct hand-like image". You'll immediately see it at first sight.

Before you answer any question about this image, you need to understand that extraneous appearances in an ultrasound image could happen BUT THEY ARE EXTREMELY RARE. Millions of people who have had children and have done several ultrasounds have perused the image, and no one till date has had any such experience. I myself have given birth to all the kids I intend to birth. I have passed the stage of begetting children. I have had many ultrasounds. Yet, I have never once had this type of experience. This imagery is a rarity. Or,how many people in that same hospital or in the entire USA,or in the world right now have come up with similar images to counteract the woman? In one of my discussions with Google AI Mode about the ultrasound, AI said,"The image itself gained massive momentum online because of its rarity" (Paraphrased).

And I have found by research that the hand image cannot happen ordinarily just like that. There must be some pressures within the woman's belly coming from either the placenta or some other body parts of the baby close to the head (meanwhile, there are no body parts of the baby close to the head). And that pressure must happen the same second the photo was taken. I repeat, whatever would naturally form.that hand is not a stable body part that has come to stay at that very spot. It happened tentatively. The tentative event MUST HAPPEN AT THE VERY SECOND AT WHICH THE ULTRASOUND SOFTWARE TOOK THAT PICTURE.

That means, for any such appearance on the ultrasound image, very stringent conditions have to be met.

Then, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Who else has that experience in that same hospital that day? The woman was not the only one getting an ultrasound.

2. Why did it have to happen to someone who was already praying to see God's hand on her baby? Is that an ordinary coincidence?

3. Why is the hand-like image resting on the head? Why didn't it stand aloof? The mother was praying for God's hand to touch her baby's head.

The following probabilities didn't happen:

1. The appearance does not have to be handlike.It could be leg-like, a single finger-like, hair-like, etc. Why did it choose to be hand-like?

2. Even if it chose to be hand-like, it could be a standalone hand-like image standing at one corner of the womb. It could face a different direction to the baby. It could stand on the baby's neck, belly, or even have the palm turned upwards. But NO! IT RESTED ON THE BABY'S HEAD. EXACTLY WHERE THE MOTHER WAS PRAYING FOR GOD'S HAND TO BE. it wasn't the back of the hand that was resting on its head. It was the hand in the actual imagery of a hand moulding something.

The appearance on the image has a prayer antecedent. We cannot brush that aside. The rarity cannot be brushed aside. The precision needed to take such a picture up to the exact second cannot be brushed aside. The position of the hand cannot be brushed aside. The direction of the hand cannot be brushed aside. The fact that the appearance chose to be a hand, and not something else cannot be brushed aside.

Take a closer look. It is clearly a hand resting on the baby's head as though it is trying to mould or remould it.

triplechoice:
I edited my comment. Ignore this one and respond to the one before this

Ask a neutral question.. Not the one you keep asking.Do not switch to Google yet. Continue with the first one so you provide the natural explanation it gave you which you cut out..

"What unnatural feature" is you telling AI the feature is "unnatural". "Around the baby's head "is telling it where to look.

The caption " hahd like shape" in the image is you feeding it with the answer .AI is garbage in, garbage out.

I told you the ChatGpt used was a temporary chat feature. It deletes immediately you close the browser. And I deliberately used it so that it would not take from any of my previous interactions with it to answer the question.

I cannot use my personal ChatGpt for this for the same reason as above. Moreover, I have exhausted my image upload quota for today.

I will use Google AI mode again with your question frame in mind.


Modified:

I have asked Google AI mode a more neutral question. The response is attached.

triplechoice:
What you called "ChatGpt's observation is your own personal observation reflected back to you.

You uploaded an image with the caption saying "hand like feature ". You didn't ask a neutral question . You fed it the answer you wanted , and it reflected your framing back to you. . Then you posted only the part that agreed with you and cut out the part that explained where it explained what could have caused the image naturally. .

You edited evidence to suit a conclusion. .

Not true at all. It's a pity I used ChatGpt's temporary chat feature for that. I'll now use Google AI mode. .

The question:

What unnatural feature did you observe around the baby's head in the attached ultrasound image?

See the response below:

You can ask the same question on your own AI. This is an absolutely neutral question. It waa deliberately neutral. No one has any pre-trained AI in Google AI Mode. So this result should be enough.

What I am using this AI query to establish is that the hand shape is clearly visible to anyone.

LordReed:
Bro very simple bring a definition of human sacrifice that is different from what I have put here.

I have attached a screenshot below.

How can you lie so brazenly? I mean this in black and white TWICE yet you still lying and you are saying I shouldn't ask if you are OK?

How exactly did I lie?

Let's agree you missed my point. I wouldn't want to accuse you of lying. This is what I said, and exactly what you quoted:

"Good!

Let me hear your views on the following scenarios:

1. The judge absolves the murderer. He just forgives him outright after refusing to try him. He just acquitted him just like that.

What would your reaction be?

2. The judge sentences the murderer but then, after careful consideration, he decides that he'll be punished on behalf of the condemned.

What would your reaction be?"

Your views were to be the baseline.

Bro my reaction and my views are the same, this isn't justice.

I have attached a screenshot below. Views are not the same as reactions.

You wanted to play a silly game so I played it too.

How can me telling you that "Nothing" is not an intelligent answer expected from the specialist be called a silly game? Can you explain?

If the specialist had said it was a hand or something remarkable why didn't she mention it? She is the one being unintelligent by not asking questions.

My friend , the specialist is a professional and would naturally not want to make any such inferences. No matter how clearly or scientifically confirmed the issue is, he wouldn't want to make any reference to the supernatural even if he believes it is supernatural. I am sure the specialist had no concrete answer for the woman. The woman must have discussed her opinion with the specialist. The specialist would have simply told her not to make any reference to him or his office regarding the matter.

If the specialist had provided a concrete answer, the woman wouldn't come out to say something else. That would be dishonest of her.

She is not supposed to believe her children who have no knowledge of ultrasound mechanics without being an adult and asking the expert.

It is not a matter of believing her children! It is a matter of what everyone can see with their eyes.

I have attached a screenshot of ChatGpt's own observation.

It totally does. She doesn't mention her medical providers and even if she did they still cannot confront her in public. You are just being obstinate about something you clearly wrong about.

I have already told you that her providers would already ask to be left out of the public discourse. This is absolutely normal.

Bro how can an intelligent person claim that a wager that a she will not like to have her view contradicted be in contradiction to her not asking questions? Like take 2 seconds to think about it before you respond.

No no no no. That's not what the wager was all about. The wager wasn't about her having her views contradicted. It was about her not seeking professional clarifications. And you already queried what type of human being would not seek professional clarifications before coming to a conclusion. You then claimed you could wager a million dollars on the probability of her not seeking such clarifications. My position is that your wager runs contrary to your logical query. Your wager can only be considered plausible if:

1. The woman is not human or is not a normal human.

2. You know the woman personally and have information on related antecedents.

Your one million dollars wager fails woefully if the above 2 conditions are not met.

Hence, the probability that the woman would seek clarifications is very high. That combined with the probability that her husband too would be curious about the appearance.

LordReed:
Bro it just seems you really have no clue what you are talking about. See the meaning of human sacrifice:

Human sacrifice is the act of killing one or more humans as part of a ritual, which is typically intended to please or appease gods, a human ruler, public or jurisdictional demands for justice by capital punishment, an authoritative/priestly figure, spirits of dead ancestors, or as a retainer sacrifice, wherein a monarch's servants are killed in order for them to continue to serve their master in the next life.

No matter how you try to spin it, anything you say will fall into this one or more of the specifics of this definition. Being the beneficiary will not change the fact that it is human sacrifice.

By your definition, even capital punishment is human sacrifice. Then, all judges are guilty if they sentence anyone to death for killing another? You see how unacceptable and flawed your definition is?

I don't know where you got that definition from but that definition is just deceptive.

Bro is something wrong with you? Is this not what you wrote:

You literally asked what my reaction will be TWICE. Now you say you didn't ask for my reaction. Bros e be like say something dey do you o. LoLz.

I don't know why atheists find it difficult to have respectful conversations or debates. Always looking for a way to insult someone who is respectfully engaging you. You actually lost my respect for this kind of conversation but I won't toe your path. I'm not that foolish.

I asked for your VIEWS. Not just an ordinary reaction. When the reaction is already defined as VIEWS, you cannot go below that and then say 'you just asked for my reaction'.

LMAO! There is no place where the ultrasound specialist was not said to have said this was not a hand, Hence it is a probability that the specialist had told her it was nothing.

If the specialist has told her it was nothing, the specialist failed. 'Nothing' is not an intelligent answer for such a phenomenon. Infact, generally, not an intelligent answer for something observable with the eyes.

This is a silly game and I can play it too.

Her ultrasound specialist saw it, her ob/gyn doctor saw it, neither raised any issue but it is when her children say it looks like a hand thats when we should take it seriously. Bro I said it before you are acting like a child and this just proves it. LoLz.

The specialists are not supposed to infer anything! That's unprofessional. Her children boight her observation, and that observation is open to anyone to scrutinize.

Bros you are yarning dust. HIPAA laws are clear I dunno what yeye argument you are making here.

What I said didn't contradict the law. The worse case scenario is for them to tell her not to make any public references to them.

LoLz. Bro I can see you are thoroughly discombobulated you have nothing to say anymore. This is the most discombobulated reasoning I have seen from you yet. Bwahahahahahahahahaha!

That's your stock in trade. You're the one who has nothing to say anymore. Then, you try to play the mocking and degradation card.

Counter my position if you can. Being abusive or being a mocker does not change the facts on ground.

If you have queried what type of human being is she to have done that, then, you can't bet a million dollars on that outcome except you know the woman personally.

LordReed:
I totally will accuse the judge of human sacrifice and anybody who sacrificed themselves in that manner as well.

Then, that'll be your person opinion. It is not reflective of the world's standards. May I also ask if your opinion would remain the same if it was your loved one, perhaps your son that was ransomed?

You asked for my reaction which is I will say this is not justice.

No. I didn't ask for your reaction. I asked for your explicit answer to the 3 layered question raised.

Bro kindly point out any place in the story where either her or her husband are said to have asked the ultrasound specialist questions.

There's also no place in the story where her or her husband are said not to have asked a specialist. Hence, we draw on probability. Ame I'm telling you that the probability of her seeking explanations far outweighs the probability of her doing the contrary.

It will involve the science of radiology which the ultrasound specialist who took it was qualified to do. She didn't avail herself of that expertise but rather just believed her children instead.

Radiology delivered that image in the first place. The only probability that could create such a hand feature, not a moulding hand, is pressure from outside the belly. The probability of any pressure being on the woman's tummy during the ultrasound is zero. And, even if there were any such external pressure, it wouldn't form a moulding hand.

If you did you'd have not said her medical providers should have openly debunked her claims

On the basis of what I did, her medical providers would commit not crime if they debunked her after following due process.

The screenshot was clear, her medical providers CANNOT openly declare themselves as her medical providers. The only way is to either for her to give her consent to directly address the matter or get a court order.

Yeah, and there was the need to for them to do both or just call her to order and tell her to stop misleading the public. Or at least explain things to her more clearly if they think she's in error.

I can bet a million dollars that she will do neither.

If you can bet a million dollar that a human being would do neither, then it contradicts your previous query: what type of a human being is that? A million dollar bet confidence on such an outcome means you've taken her behavior as normal human behavior. Meanwhile, I'm telling you that the probability of her not doing either is slim because no normal human being behaves like that.

kpankpangolo:
In English?

Of course.

kpankpangolo:
If it wasn’t said in English, I do not believe it. Western media lies a lot.

Something that is clearly written in their Quran. It's also boldly written in their chatter.

LordReed:
That is not justice. No matter how you try to spin it it is not justice. He sacrificed himself, he sacrificed Jesus, Jesus sacrificed himself, none of it represents justice.

I'm yet to talk about justice. I'm just telling you that your claims about an innocent human who got sacrificed is wrong.

If I offer myself to die on behalf of a convict who was sentenced to death, you cannot accuse the judge of murder or of human sacrifice. Neither can you accuse the person who sacrificed himself.

None of this represents justice.

We're yet to discuss justice my friend. We're still on the way. I beg your indulgence. Please answer that question.

Someone scanned your womb you saw something unidentified and you just went away? What kind of person is that? She didn't ask the ultrasound specialist what is this? These are simple things people can do to verify what they are looking at.

Very good observation.

And that's why you should believe her story the more.

The rational thing every human being would do would be to ask questions from the lab specialists and the doctors. Trust me. Every human would do that. If the woman didn't, the husband would ask for explanations from the medical practitioners involved. The probability of the woman not asking questions is very slim. And, especially as Americans. Both husband and wife cannot miss this important step. The probability that an American would not ask for explanations is almost zero if not zero.

So, a balanced conclusion is for you to know that the woman cannot boldly make a claim without first asking questions. No human being does that.

You probably think I am asking for some type of scientific experiment

Perhaps.

All the physical attributes of the image before us point to a hand moulding or remolding a head. Any other investigation beyond that imagery would invariably involve science.

Bro you don't know what you are saying. See the attached screenshot. HIPAA laws are very strict.

Yes they are. I know them. I have designed a patient management software for a clinic in the US before, and I had to study the law as part of the compliance frameworks for the app.

That is best for a ultrasound specialist to interpret.

I'm sure they did, and would most certainly distance themselves from the woman's claims if they think she's misleading the public. You can see that the screenshot you shared came with caveats that do not fall within the jurisdiction of this woman's claims. Just look at the 'ifs'.

ChristCee:
Whatever he is. I don't care. I fly frequently and I would want the aviation minister to take his job more seriously

Military aircrafts are not within the purview of the aviation ministry!

LordReed:
According to your beliefs the god who was still in heaven had sent Jesus to die for the sins of humanity and Jesus was sinless. Therefore the god was sacrificing an innocent human for the misdeeds of others. That is not justice my guy.

That's not it. But if He sent Jesus purposely because of that, what problems do you have with that?

However, God came down as Jesus to pay the debts of mankind. That's not the same thing as sacrificing an innocent man. You probably have a problem with God sacrificing Himself. He literally gave Himself. You hate Him for doing that?

Quite possibly.

Good!

Let me hear your views on the following scenarios:

1. The judge absolves the murderer. He just forgives him outright after refusing to try him. He just acquitted him just like that.

What would your reaction be?

2. The judge sentences the murderer but then, after careful consideration, he decides that he'll be punished on behalf of the condemned.

What would your reaction be?

Because you don't have the data to back up your assertion. But that is good.

According to people who ask you to believe and not verify

What exactly do you want me to verify? To verify that the ultrasound image wasn't AI? Or to verify that the hand on the fetus was not artificially inserted?

How if I don't have the original images? Why didn't she verify?

What should she verify?

She should verify whether she was given a manipulated ultrasound result?

Look up HIPAA laws. Her medical providers cannot release any information about her without her consent or a court order. Notice that it was not a specialist who told her what was in the ultrasound, it was her children. Then she didn't go back to the ultrasound specialist to verify she just started believing. That is what you are calling evidence. LoLz.

HIPPA laws do not criminalize the act of clarifying misleading information. The law manages the security and integrity of data. If the information the woman is spreading is misleading to the public, the law allows the integrity of the data to be established.

Bro sometimes you talk like a Johnny just come from a secluded village. In this day and age you don't know that structures within the human body take on weird shapes when imaged? Have you never seen an ultrasound image before?

Yes, structures do.

But what structure forms a hard that holds a baby's head as though it's remolding it. Maybe you should take a closer look at the image.

Whatever bro it is irrelevant to this discussion.

It isn't part of the discussion. Just letting you know I'm not projecting anything on you.

LordReed:
Bro stop acting obtuse. This is the essence of your belief in Jesus and his so called sacrifice of the cross.

How's Jesus sacrificing Himself the same as killing an innocent human? Did Jesus kill any innocent human?

Come to think of it some did kill my loved one. Someone killed my sister's husband and the case is in court so yes I do want justice.

Thank you for your answer.

If you will want Justice for your sister's husband, do you believe someone who's very sister, daughter or son was killed would even want justice more than you do?

Very fewer scientists become believers in a god after all their studies compared to the general population. See the attached picture.

Well, I wouldn't want to digress.

Nope.



That is scam language.

According to lordreed.

That is what we call audio. Na hear we dey hear am. We need verification. Go find where an ultrasound specialist confirmed that that is the ultrasound image of a hand inside the womb that doesn't belong to the baby.

Then go do the verification instead of calling it audio.

She said she prayed, and then showed ultrasound evidence. That's no more audio. The testimony went viral in Kentucky. Is a gynecologist dead? Or why has she not been confronted and her claims debunked?

Nope, she needs to prove it is a hand. Her word is worthless.

She doesn't need to prove it is a hand. Even the blind knows it's a hand. You're the one to disprove that. You don't need to prove something the eyes are seeing. If you think it's not a hand, disprove the hand we all are seeing.

Or do I need to prove to you that this is Nairaland? Everyone is seeing it's Nairaland. If you think otherwise, you're the one to prove to us it's not Nairaland.

She is interpreting an amorphous image as something that is not evidence of anything.

She is not interpreting anything. She's staring what every eye can see.

You are trying to pivot to "you still have not met Jesus".

That's not a pivot. That's a response telling you why I'm engaging you, after you claimed I'm projecting my ideas on you.

LordReed:
If you understood justice you would know that killing an innocent human being in the name of paying ANOTHER PERSON'S debt is not justice but injustice.

Would you tell me who killed an innocent human being and the innocent human being he killed?

I don't know if I will forgive or not. I will be in a highly emotional state so I cannot predict my reaction especially if there are people around me giving me some comfort.

Would you want Justice or reject justice?

No problem as far as you have owned the sentiment it's all good. LoLz

It is not all around me. You choosing to interpret every blowing wind as your god in action is not evidence neither is an ambiguous blob in an ultrasound.

It's not just the wind. The more scientists get to know science, the more they come to the realization of God's existence.

It's all around you, my friend.

Then you should have asked for it instead of jumping to unwarranted conclusions.

Meanings taken within contexts need no questions.

There is no reason to accept such a conclusion without evidence.

The interconnection between the Asking and the Receiving is the evidence.

I don't need to disprove her, she needs to prove her claim so do you. Neither of you are radiologists or ultrasound technicians so your word is as valuable as sand.

The interconnection between her prayers and the manifestation of the hand is her proof. You can disprove her.

In other words she said so. Where you there when she prayed? Was the prayer recorded? You have nothing but she said, I reject that as evidence of a supernaturalhand in her womb that was not verified by any specialists analysis.

Yes, she said so. She's the only authority on her own personal experience. I and every same person have reasons to believe she prayed until proven otherwise. You can take that to the courts. Personal testimonies are taken seriously until they're proven to be false. You can prove her to be lying.

If you ask your dealer to deliver a Venza and he sends you a picture of a Venza, he has not delivered a Venza to you.

Please understand that God did not send her a picture of a hand.

But it's your modus operandi to attempt to dribble yourself is what I am saying. Look at you now attempting to pivot to something else. LoLz.

I didn't pivot to something else. What did I pivot into? Can you clarify?

MaxInDHouse:
A Pharisee, Sadducees, Scribe or ex follower of Jesus will say the same nah!

So to prove you know how to distinguish between light and darkness can you now present a group that's performing better than Jehovah's Witnesses?

In the first century Jesus exposed all forms of false religions but he didn't leave his audience in the dark rather he presented the group that's performing excellently in God's sight by pointing to his disciples saying they are his brothers and sisters {Matthew 12:46-50} so if Jesus is God's son it means his disciples who are following his footsteps are equally God's children! John 1:11-12

I present to you the one and only organization of true believers: Jehovah's Witnesses and i am one of them.

Oya present the group you are associating with just as Jesus did because people can see their fine works as a group.🙂

The fact that you're always hammering on a group like it's a cult already exposed you. Jesus does not relate with groups. He relates with individuals. He's not coming back for groups. He's coming back for individuals.

The fact that you're always shouting group, group, group already makes you a deceiver.

Jesus is coming for individuals who'll be able to stand before Him on that day. Did you see any group here?

Luke 21:36

"So keep watch at all times, and pray that you may have the strength to escape all that is about to happen and to stand before the Son of Man.”

Note: Individuals are to stand before the Son of man, not groups.

Revelation 7:9

"After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands,"

Note: Did you see any group here?

Revelation 3:21

"The one who conquers, I will grant him to sit with me on my throne, as I also conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne"

Note: Jesus is rewarding THE ONE who conquers. Not the group that conquers. In all His letters to the churches, His emphasis was ALWAYS on THE ONE who conquers. Not on the group that conquers.

Revelation 22:12

“Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done."

Note: Jesus will reward EACH PERSON. Not each group.

Revelation 20:15

"Anyone whose name was not found written in the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire."

Note: God is casting individuals into the lake of fire. Not groups. ANYONE. Not any group.

Philippians 2:12

"Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling,"

Note: WORK OUT YOUR OWN SALVATION. Individuals are to work out their own salvation with fear and trembling. Groups are not the ones who work out salvation. It is individuals.

Genuine servants of our God lay emphasis on the individual soul. False teachers and ministers of darkness lay emphasis on groups.

MaxInDHouse:
Now you know what it means to have a reputable group you want to tarnish the good name of Jehovah's Witnesses because you can't mention any useful religion to which you belong but claiming Christian when everyone know that that name "Christians" has been hijacked by thousands of different religions!🥱

God forbid that I tarnish anyone's image. But, I have the responsibility to expose the evil works of darkness of which the fake Jehovah Witnesses are chief. For so I am commanded:

"Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them." Ephesians 5:11.

LordReed:
It's you who doesn't understand how justice works. It is not justice to sacrifice a human being to satisfy the blood cravings of a purported supernatural being.

If you understand how justice works, you wouldn't be blaming God for offering to pay the sinner's debts.

I have no idea where exactly my limit is because there are so many factors I cannot determine at this moment that might play into it however I have given you something egregious I wouldn't forgive.

Okay, let me help you.

God forbid bad things, if someone murders a person you so much love, can you forgive him? God forbid it in Jesus name.

This is an unnecessary nitpick. You have admitted to holding the sentiment.

No. The best thing for you to do is to first have my clarification on that before using your generalization on me. It is not everything you hear out there that I support. That's what I wanted you to know.

Ehh, no I won't. I have no reason to. Why is it that when I ask you to produce evidence of your god you've never produced any of these pictures you want ME to go find. LoLz

The evidence of my God is everywhere around you. If you close your eyes to the evidences, how can I help you? This ultrasound is not just a coincidence. It is the result of an action.

E be like say kòlò don dey wake up. How does "That is not the ultrasound image of a hand coming from outside." equivalent to that is a hand? Only a disingenuous person will attempt to make sure a dense connection.

Please understand what is called 'context' and 'implied meanings'. If that's not what you meant, then make that clarification.

I dunno know what it is. I am not as conceited as you to claim certainty of things I have no knowledge of. However I am confident enough that the generality of human experience can provide evidence and in this case unknown hands don't enter the womb from outside during an ultrasound.

It doesn't matter whether it does or not. What matters is that the hand is a result of prayer. And if that's not a hand, tell us what you think it is.

you cannot shift the burden to me to prove your position. She prayed for god's hand is not evidence or else we should believe every similar claim that is not from people who don't believe like you do too. We reject all such claims because they cannot meet the burden of proof just like you can't.

No no no no. That's not how to disprove an assertion. If you have no proof, then the assertion stands. You have to prove that's not a hand, or better still, prove that's not the hand of God. If you can prove that, the woman herself would stop her proclamation. If you cannot disprove her, her claim stands.

If I take a picture of a hand and claim it is Julius Ceaser's hand will you believe just because I said so? A big fat NO so similarly I reject your say so.

Yes, I'll believe if you showed me the authentic source of your claim. This woman didn't just make a claim. She provided prayer as the source of her claim.

If I ask my dealer to send me a Toyota Venza, and I suddenly welcome a Toyota Venza in my house, I will believe the Venza is from my dealer until proven otherwise.

Stop projecting your favorite past time on to me. LoLz.

Nothing is being projected on you my friend. I've been away, only to return to see you still have not met Jesus. It's just disheartening. People are encountering Jesus daily except you guys.

MaxInDHouse:
If this person is talking about JW the case would have been totally different but it's you who started talking about us when the OP never mentioned JW.
So you need help because you don't even know what Jesus said about supernatural acts which could be from any source!🥱

You mean I should never talk about JW? If you don't already know that this isn't possible, then you should know you really need help.

MaxInDHouse:
You mentioned me once you are talking about JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES!🥱

Lol.

Your truly not a serious person.

So if you truly want to prove you are sincere why did you mention the name of my organization?

Come on stop being childish here i'm Maximus one of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES so whenever you mention the name of my group you have automatically mentioned me!

So respond to the comment and stop being deluded!🤔

Lol.

It shows you're not serious. So, you meant I should never address any JW issues here again? You need help.

MaxInDHouse:
Jesus said it's by their fruits {Matthew 7:16-18} not their acts of supernatural powers! Matthew 7:21-23

So if you can't present the fruit of faith in false religion but want everyone to just swallow whatever they claim then you're deceiving yourself!

What are the fruits?

MaxInDHouse:
What concerns us with your lies and self deception?

Is it supernatural acts we hate or your claims that they are all from Jesus?

Jesus himself said many will claim they performed miracles but he will say he doesn't know them {Matthew 7:21-23} so how do you expect a right thinking person to be carried away with your illusion?🤔

So, you still mentioned me again after you said I should stop mentioning you. You are just very dishonest. You were promising heaven and hell that day that you would never mention me again since you have asked me not to mention you ever again.

Well, since you've mentioned me, I will reply you.

Jesus said "These signs shall follow them that believe..."

Then, the Scriptures say, 'Try all spirits, hold firm to that which is true'

What have you tried ? What truth have you found before you started claiming these are all lies and illusions? Upon what authority do you make these assertions?

Botragelad:
The UAE and flydubai are in serious trouble for employing a man whom Oman had already flagged as a security risk over his extremist views. Those included refusing to shake hands with women and, according to reports, material linked to radical Islamic ideology that praised suicide attacks. Despite those warnings, flydubai took him on and put him in the cockpit of a flight to Israel.

Also our info says he may not have acted entirely alone, there are likely collaborators who helped prepare or activate him for this attack. Had he succeeded in crashing the aircraft into Israel, this could easily have matched or exceeded the casualties of 11 September 2001. He was a Muslim, and this is exactly the kind of threat we continue to face from Islamic terrorists.

Edit: As for the Islamist who quoted** ranting and asking how the UAE would be in trouble, maybe you’re missing the point. This isn’t just about Flydubai or the terrorist being Omani. The UAE itself has responsibility here.

This is a matter of aviation security, national security and vetting within the UAE’s aviation system. If a man had already been flagged by another country over security concerns and somehow ended up employed as a pilot by a UAE airline, then questions are obviously going to land on the UAE as well.

The UAE has its own aviation authorities, security procedures and requirements to vet people. You can’t have islamists operating a passenger aircraft through your aviation system and then wash your hands that easy.

The point is that if there was a prior security warning and he still passed through the UAE’s system and into a cockpit, the UAE will have some serious questions to answer about how that happened. More discovery.

He wasn't even a trained pilot. He studied Aviation Management through distant learning. How exactly did he find his way into piloting? UAE has a lot of questions to answer.

LordReed:
Is your god a man that is limited by the impact any action has on him? I am a man limited by several things so I am sure I have a limit when it comes to forgiveness. I wouldn't forgive someone like Hitler for sure. Why is my limit any kind of measure for your supposedly limitless god?

No, you don't understand.

That's not the purpose of the question.

I'm asking about you. What is that offence a man can commit against you that you cannot forgive? I'm asking you as a person.

None of your actions affect God in anyway. But it seems you don't understand how justice works. So, first answer my question please.

LoLz. You might not have said that previously but here you are saying it anyway so why the contradiction?

There's no contradiction. You should make sure I said it before ever attributing it to me.

I am saying I support what you heard. But I was not the one who said what you heard.

How is it that in the nearly a century of video and more than a century of photography your god or angels have never been definitively been captured on any media?

You can search online. God and Angels have revealed themselves many times. You only deny, just as you're doing now.

It is spurious pareidolia induced interpretations like this ultrasound image you can point to?

You mentioned that there's a hand there in your previous mention. Are you also disillusioned?

Kindly point out where I admitted it was a hand.

In the attached screenshot, you clearly never disputed the presence of a hand. Instead you disputed the direction of the hand. You were only saying the hand was not coming from outside.

Now, if you think it's not a hand, please tell us what it is.

The burden of proof is on you to evidence that it is the hand of your god and not that of the devil or any other external agent or just simply an artifact of the environment ie the womb in which the fetus is located.

No, if the hand had appeared because the mother asked for the devil's hand, it would be the hand of the devil then. But the proof is that the mother prayed for the hand of God, and a hand appeare. Additionally, the hand did exactly what the mother asked the hand to do.

The burden of proof lies on you to prove to us that the hand was not the hand of God. OUR PROOF LIES IN THE FACT THAT SHE INVITED THE HAND OF GOD, AND THE GOD'S HAND HONOURED THE INVITATION.

If you feel that a different hand honoured the invitation, prove it.

And your question here is another proof that you believe indeed it's a hand. Otherwise, you wouldn't be asking me to prove that it's God's hand and not the hand of the devil.

Why are you dribbling yourself?

LordReed:
He gave up himself by arranging for his own death to please himself. That is still ritual human sacrifice. No matter how you try to spin it, it is disgusting.

No. You don't understand.

First, tell me, what is the highest offence anyone can commit against you that you can never forgive? First answer this question please.

You don't know what you are saying. Are you not the people who keep telling us that your god cannot be photographed? Now suddenly he can be. LoLz. You are a joker.

Can you tell me where I ever said God cannot be photographed? I've never said that but if you ever heard that, that's not a lie. God cannot be seen. He cannot be photographed but that is half truth. You have also heard that God does manifest Himself. He reveals Himself. Especially when He wants to boost your faith or give you assurance. Both God and Angels do reveal themselves occasionally. You have heard that too? I know you've heard that too,

That is not the ultrasound image of a hand coming from outside.

God is neither inside nor outside. He's everywhere, and can manifest Himself everywhere.

But, thank God. You admitted that's a hand. Who's hand was that in your opinion? The hand in the inside of the womb. Who's hand was it? The doctor's hand? The baby's hand? The mother's hand? The father's hand? Or your own hand?

LordReed:
He made a human sacrifice of himself to himself. Still disgusting and weird.

You are the one who doesn't understand what pareidolia is. It is not the image that is the illusion it is your interpretation of it.

No, he didn't sacrifice Himself to Himself. He gave up Himself. Condemned Himself instead of condemning you because justice must be served.

No, an ultrasound with clear images does not need any interpretation, and therefore, no illusion.

HacheNoire:
So you believe the show taught him how to set the rudder, aileron and elevator, to recover the plane.

It’s okay! You have a right to your beliefs but that will never fly with me.

Yeah. It can. I'm into aviation myself. A lot of documentaries, not just shows, can teach a skill. It doesn't mean he'll be able to fly a plane. He might just know the right thing to do in such a situation. Many people have driven cars without ever learning to drive. My younger brother is one.

HacheNoire:
.

It's not impossible. He watched documentaries, not just shows. He just had to pull the right thing to keep the plane steady.

If you can't deny the plunge, then you can't deny the stabilization that prevented the crash.

HacheNoire:
The plumber said he watched it on TV shows and implemented it under duress. Do you buy that?

Now it’s miracle? Inexplainable logic! Okay! So we now agree it’s outrightly impossible in normal sense?

No. I read that he said he has an aviation background. Not just watching in TV shows.

Yes, many times unexplainable things do happen. That does not mean the events described are false.

A mother prayed for God to touch her sick baby, and she saw God's hands on the child's ultrasound. That's unexplainable but it happened anyway.

HacheNoire:
They were propelled by the force and did not end up with a broken neck or spinal cord.

You still don’t know what you talking about! That’s a death sentence to have your seatbelt unbuckled at that instance.

How about the oxygen mask that failed to deploy?

Then the biggest lie is that a plumber stabilized an aircraft that was already past her stalling limit!

Common! If I told you I did that, you will call me a liar.

A plumber that has an aviation background can stabilize an aircraft.

Yes, the propulsion may not affect them as you have hoped because in this circus, miracles do happen. Even Iran testified saying Israel uses demons.

But a more logical explanation is that the plumber was there when he heard shouts in the cockpit - that was before the attacker took over from the stabbed pilots.

LordReed:
Then it was a ritual human sacrifice. Disgusting.

He did it to Himself. Not to anyone.

He loves boundlessly. You can see a show of His love on that baby in the X-ray when its mother prayed.

You don't seem to understand what pareidolia is. An X-ray is not a product of imagination..

HacheNoire:
People propelled themselves? Are you joking?

Do you have an imagination of the force you up against? It’s like me telling you to remove your seatbelt and slam the brakes at 220mph. Can you propel yourself without not jumping out through the windshield?

I can see you don’t have an ideas of what you trying to paint. People propelled themself to the cockpit at approximately 1G on a descend.

Did you hear me say people propelled themselves? They were propelled by the diving force. And that's not the same as applying brakes to moving vehicle. They'll be propelled forward but since the plane is still in motion, the impact won't be as dangerous as that of a vehicle suddenly applying the brakes. People would still find their way into the cockpit.

I believe that the plumber was the first to enter before the nosediving started. And from what he described, he himself manicured the plane while struggling with the attacker. He said he has an aviation background. Don't forget that. I repeat, he has an aviation background, according to the plumber himself. So, the plumber steadied the plane, people could then regain balance. The plumber described how he grabbed the attacker and pulled at him.

HacheNoire:
That is the point you missing!

A plane nosedived at that rate and you were told someone ran into the cockpit to save the plane.

Now make that statement make sense to the best of your knowledge.

What I'm telling you is that humans won't be stationary at that point. Did the Indian pilot stab himself too? No matter how speedily the plaine was nosediving, people would still propelled themselves into the cockpit because they know that's the only way they could live. A nosediving plane does not make humans stationary.