...and those flaws can be genetically traced.

yea, what are you looking for though?  

I have, you smacked your head and didn't read it thoroughly... you can't tell someone the truth unless they're willing to hear it.

links that consist of people like me talking and... oh yes balderdash... has nothing to do with maybe some rationale behind it.

recheck those balderdash links,.. lets' discuss them instead of dismissing them.  Maybe you can point out the problems

scientific evidence?  yes, it says it right in the article and why that's the case without dismissing the understanding that it still happens.

And who is responsible for creating the rather imperfect method of transmitting genes that lead to all those flaws?

Well since I asked if you had evidence of demonic possession a person might infer that I am looking for evidence of demonic possession. Anything that doesn't consist of me having to take your word (or someone else's) for it.

No you didn't, you provided me a link of someone talking. I want evidence, not speech or rhetoric. I want videos, MRI's, blood tests, I want double blind studies where people who are possessed are broken into separate groups, some treated with exorcisms and others with traditional psych meds, I want you to give me some plausible reason to believe that there is some type of non-material parasite in the brain. 

I can provide you links of people talking about the little green aliens that probed them last night. Yet you don't believe there are little green men visiting our planet. Why do you believe in demons, but not aliens? Oh yeah, you have not seen any evidence of aliens, well I have not seen any evidence of demonic possession. So give me something that would convince you if it was aliens that were the issue. I am quite sure if I just link to http://www.doaliensexist.org/ that you are not suddenly going to buy it. (At least I hope not) 

For starters, it is nothing but a series of naked assertions. The only sources it links to are itself. It declares what demons are, it declares the properties of demons but does nothing to prove they really exist any more than the snarfwargle that is sitting next to me. It doesn't even bother doing a decent case study. 

So you believe something that has absolutely no evidence. At least we got you to almost admit it. Now you have a problem, if demonic possession were real it would leave evidence. The claim is that demonic possession manifests itself in very material ways through the person that is possessed. Why can't anyone do a scientific study of people who are possessed and various exorcism techniques and compare those results to regular psychologists? (The places I have seen can't even agree which exorcism techniques work and which don't). It is perfectly possible to do a scientific study even when the main object of the study can't be observed directly. 

For example, your story

Ok, we have something physical that can be proven/disproven. The streetlights are going out, all of them? Or just sometimes? Because you know, lights do go out sometimes. Indeed, many street lights have this nifty feature that they detect movement and only turn on when they detect movement and then turn off. But I will assume that you already considered such pedestrian explanations. Lights go out when you get close to them, why is your first response to pray? Why isn't your first call maybe to the city and say "hey, your street lights are going wacky"? Why didn't you go to the doctor and say, "Hey Doc, I'm possessed watch this!" Was it just streetlights or your house lights too? Perhaps after you prayed the city utilities fixed their electric problem.

Maybe it was aliens. Why do you assume demons? Maybe the government planted a small emp type weapon on you to test it out. Irrational? Yep, but not any more than concluding it was demonic possession.

I had a car that was possessed once. It needed a jump and so I hooked it up and without turning the keys the car immediately started up, ran 30 seconds and turned off, sat 30 seconds and turned back on. Apparently, my car had been doing that all night (hence why it needed a jump). Making things more freaky, it just so happened to be Halloween. Being the skeptic I am, my first reaction was to take it to my mechanic because I had no clue. He looked at me like I was crazy when I explained the problem and turning the car off, I took out the key and it started the cycle again. I probably should have tried praying the demon away because it took the mechanic about four hours to find the problem and cost me several hundred even after he gave me a decent discount. Of course, the car was not possessed, it turned out that the remote car starter had gone on the fritz and was having an issue with the anti-theft system. Electricity can do odd things and create odd intermittent problems that are difficult to track down.      

How is there a degree to being all knowing? You either know everything, or you don't know everything. I think the real discussion would be about what the word "know" means for God.

Yes, I tend to get pissed off when people tell me they worship the being who (according to them) created me fucked-up on purpose.

Could she herself have been evil? No.   Could she have been under the control of a malevolent disembodied consciousness? While I really doubt it, I suppose it's possible...

I do not recall saying I wanted to hear your evidence so I could try to dispute it. I meant it when I said I was interested in hearing about your experiences, sources, and knowledge.

While I have no idea how a disembodied consciousness could interact with a streetlight, I do find your story quite interesting. I'm being serious, by the way--I really do think that story is interesting and I'd definitely like to hear more.

I've never heard of a "prayer warrior" before; what does it mean/entail, exactly?

I never said demons definitely aren't real--I just said I've never seen enough credible evidence to think they are.

How ?

oh no, that's the problem... though there are some erronius genes here and there that can change on their own... as far as we know, those genes aren't changed significantly and don't typically lead to major disorders, rather they're usally flukes that don't get transmitted into the next generation... seems like smart design to me. 

I'm referring to the genes that were transmitted perfectly, but were slowly changed over generations into what they have become... which is flawed..

The erronius genes idea is for another thread another time, but that has to do wtih God creating everything with a design to run and reproduce on its own, again adapting to changes that need to be made... Again long convo for a different thread.

like??...... um personal experience, records, unrelated scenarios with congruencies, conversation with an expert? 

ok, it is understood that the average mental hospital likely has 1 or more possessed persons mistaken to have a mental disorder... those being treated have not responded well to treatment which is why they're admitted to a mental hospital.  Others who are treated with exorcisms... proper ones, typically are rid of the possession within 30 miinutes or so... check the mental hospitals for patient records and symptom lists, then check with churches who have people trained in exorcism... they likely are doing them often.  

Simply put, I think you're on the right track... I don't have the means to set up such a study and run it for you.  

maybe because that particular study doesn't think they exist outside the mind... Might want to read it more carefully... i didn't post those links because they defended my position, they only shed some light on a scientific approach to it.

um... no... just because science can't find a physical manifestation of it, and/or hasn't defined it as a mental disorder doesn't suggest that there's no evidence. These particular studies talk about lab tests... they go on to explain that the problem with science is its limit is the physical.

for a place that would agree on exorcism techniques, we might want to start looking at a place that actually teaches it... that's information we're likely not going to find in full detail online... not convenience rather, it's dangerous to put it online and assume that someone would read it and think they could do it on their own.

After his most recent post I can see that's not what he was saying... had to play a guessing game, but to be honest, that's what was coming across though he refused to modify his wording for so long.  

I think interesting your knee jerk response is me trying to pull something... even still

the article defined them as extremists... and for lack of a better term, they are

in possession cases, demons don't just manifest outside the body, they're in a person, hence the term possession.  

many are conflicting beliefs, but North Korea for example isn't.

ok, now just like you, i can't take your word on it... examples of abuse happening don't work either because abuse happens in and out of belief systems... What basis do you have for that understanding?

sure it affects the real world, but you seem to assume my belief automatically affects it negatively...  I've never been a part of an abuse case and none of those I'm with who follow the belief I follow have either.  If my belief is real, there's a serious cost for shedding it.  

...and what if by doing that, they see there's nothing to worry about and decide that becasue there's no demons or no God that they can get away with abuse as long as no one finds out?  Same hypothetical as yours.

there are stories for both sides obviously... if you found one, you can find the other most likely

Santa... This Saint Nicholas character was just a generous guy with a big heart for children who suffered in poverty... that's all... his deeds were manipulated to this fantastic story of a fat red guy flying around in a slay and sliding down chimneys giving toys to greedy kids.  

They likely wouldn't be teaching from the Bible... not very Christian

including no more symptoms??? that's not entirely true

more than there are abuses unrelated to belief would be a start... we're a long way away from that number

Can you reference that please?

well, you can't really know what a person believes unless they tell you, and if they're commonly dishonest, i guess you might never know.. the point was, regardless of belief, they can still use it as an excuse if they know others will buy it.... 

problem with your case, I believe, but I dont' buy it

I read the links and I quoted the german passage to saying nothing about implementing abuse onto someone.  Nothing has described ill action by the people involved, rather what she had done to herself...so it seemed.  Again, if what yo say is true, then it's a bad example... I'll leave it at that.

advanced or not, there still as far as I know is no one medicine to treat all the mental disorders she could have been diagnosed with... she'd still ahve to be comotose and tied to a bed.

among many other excuses for abuse.. you're using belief as an excuse as if the majority of cases has to do with belief.. which they don't.

I don't, but by what you believe, you're telling them I do

that's great...however you'd better have a better approach than what you'er trying to use on me... you won't get far at all with your abuse excuse...  Also, its' hard for me to do that when i believe in it myself.

no, it's more like, who thought he should do an exorcism, it's obvious he's clueless

not at all, but they can include a number of symptoms... like the common cold:  headaches, fever, sore throat, cough, nausia and vomiting, exhaustion, etc.  however any one of those symptoms or any number of them can show up in one person, but the opposite in another, yet they both can be diagnosed with the typical common cold.  Same with possession.

not any more fantasy than your scenario.  You gave me one side of it, i gave the other... either both of us described a fantasy, or both of us described a realistic possibility

the way you worded it made sense... he did not word it that way.

what I understood him to be asking for was fanatical proof

just to clarify for you, I was quoting back what I was understanding from him... if it was wrong, instead of all the excuses, just explain it differently... saves everyone a lot of time

I did that at first thinkign the part about how I'd feel about it wouldnt' matter in the quote... it apparently did so I replied again with teh whole phrase in tact.. every single word... you and him still got stuck on that despite the literal quote with nothing taken out... give it up

maybe there's more to it than that... it's clear you both dont' know much about the topic except for what the comic books say

I thought I made that pretty clear... you and nony don't understand the subject matter

by... understanding the... subject matter ... which btw, doesn't necessarily make you believe something is real

abnormal psych is an actual college level course... not made up, same with the topic of origin for that statement, which is why the course was mentioned.

When I did it, I didn't realize that nony and you would think I rearranged and deleted words to ignore anything... which is why i reposted with the whole quote, nothing taken out... 

what's vague about it?  it's what you and nony have been doing

Whenever you're ready... I've been head first in this conversation.  I've called nony out on all his running around and he's still trying to get away from that... I know you're trying to defend him, but I think you're smarter than that.  I never once meant to be condescending in any of my replies btw, I'm sorry if you felt that way toward you or anyone else on this thread

Start with the Voice of Martyrs; http://www.persecution.com.  A lot of the coutries are of other faiths, but typically it's governments and law enforcement that target Christians in communist etc countries... North Korea is a perfect example of a country lacking any belief in any god other than their president and through the government orders, Chrsitians and their families are tortured and killed.

Then stop doing it ! All I did was state a fact you're desperate to ignore.

What question ? Reference what you're talking about.

READ THE QUESTION : "....BEFORE SOMEONE PRODUCES IT !!!!!" BEFORE ! You can only say it was possible AFTER it gets produced ! And YOU're the one who claims there's proof ! NOT ME !

In-bloody-credible. You STILL didn't answer the question and asked me one instead !

Oh wait, you answer it later. Awesome.

WTF ??? YOU HAD TO TAKE WORDS AND VERBS OUT THE SENTENCE AND REARRANGE IT BEFORE YOU COULD EVEN MISS THE POINT !!!!!!! AND THAT'S SOMEHOW MY FAULT ?? THAT'S A GUESSING GAME ?????

That really is one amazing set of brass balls you have there.  

Yeah, I'm framing that one. Okay ! Phew ! Man, that took some doing. 

You just admitted there is nothing wrong with my "approach". Produce the proof or admit there is none. 

I have already explained, time and time again, that you can't explain nonsense with more nonsense. If you don't understand that, then tell me. 

You got it eventually, and I didn't even have to change a single word, so what are you even talking about ? 

Again, you can't back up nonsense with more nonsense. I told you what proof would be acceptable, and we just destroyed your "irrational proof" excuse. 

So I'm not as much confused as happily surprised you would try the exact same thing again. 

This is fantastic. You're actually assuming that I was assuming something. Amazing.

Since you didn't specify, I looked for anything. I hope you're not suggesting that I should have asked you first what to look for, and then me spotting that would have somehow counted as "proof for demons". Because that would just be too funny. And too easy.

Oh, and you can drop the word "realistic", when talking about "demons". We just established and agreed that proof for demons is going to seem irrational before someone produces it. 

Yeah, that also doesn't count as an argument. Sorry.

I adequately explained why it does answer your question. All you did in reply was slam your head against you keyboard. Therefore my answers stand and you have a sore head.

If you were to quit assuming stuff, we could seriously limit the length of these replies, methinks.

Sorry to burst your bubble again, but no, that was me explaining why you can't fake the proof I asked for. And as we just agreed (I framed it !) the proof I asked for is only going to SEEM IRRATIONAL BEFORE SOMEONE (that would be you, not me) PRODUCES IT.

More please, I'm having fun now.

According to my definition, that wouldn't be disbelief. 

Then be sure to include the sentence where you specify the questions as such. 

So are your claims about me and truth. So we're back where we started 

Like I said, back where we started, so nope. Guess we'd better ask Brian what you're doing here.

Dude, AGAIN, you actually deleted words and verbs from a question I asked you, rearranged them in a totally new sentence, and then tried to pretend it was the same thing !

And lets try to forget how many times you tried to justify nonsense by adding on even more of it. Heck, you tried that in this post ! 

Wrong again. You've been throwing pejoratives at me like "fanatical" and now "delusion", hoping it would stick or distract me. Sorry, not gonna happen.

And we most certainly have made progress. I will happily drag you the rest of the way. Short trip, so no worries.

Another belief ? Boy, you have lots. They just seem to pop up whenever you need 'em.  Meanwhile, I can just point at what you actually wrote.

Who needs an excuse ? I mean, I'll bet you're cooking up another one of those half-baked insults right now...Yup, here it comes

Aaand here's that little trick again : "Let's accuse the person I'm talking to of something really stupid. Maybe he'll get mad enough so I can derail the conversation even further from the facts I'm trying to avoid."

This is about, what, the third time you tried the "sects" thing ? 

Still not working. Sorry.

I did, and you know what, I think I summarized the situation very well. 

You noticed that wasn't a question, right ? You just made some conclusion about me not admitting something. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to "answer" that.

It would ? Absolutely fantastic ! Then all you have to do is reproduce said magical question as simply and succinctly as you know how, and you'll be sitting pretty.

Bring it on. 

See, the thing is that we can easily check if you're making sense or not, and we can even more easily ascertain if you're reading what I wrote, or what you wrote. 

So yeah, sorry, that won't work as an excuse for not producing your magic question, if it exists, so bring it. 

We're pretty close, yeah, and there's no way back for you. But I don't wanna kick you over the finish line. I'd prefer it if you took the step yourself.

Produce the proof, or admit there isn't any proof for demons. ("irrational proof" excuse, dealt with)

Excellent suggestion. Let's do that : Produce the proof, or admit there's no proof for demons. ("irrational proof" excuse dealt with)

Oh, I'll just bet you want to start over. No need. We'd only end up in the same spot, as you would eventually with anyone here who discussed this with you. I just took a short-cut.

And btw, we have been talking rationally about this. I suspect that might be your problem here. 

Providing acceptable proof for demons, or admitting there isn't any. ("irrational proof" excuse dealt with)

Again, it was a perfectly simply and short sentence with sound grammar and syntax, expressing an even more simple notion. What "guessing game" you were playing is a complete mystery to anyone but yourself.

No, what's interesting is that this is only your second sentence and you're assuming things about me already. That was not a "knee jerk" response. 

"Article" ? That page linked to more source material than you could read in a week. It wasn't a single "article", and you are the one who's defining them as "extremists". That word isn't even used. These people are pastors, priests, bishops and even cardinals.

You cannot prove "demons" or "posssession" even exist, so what you just said is pure fiction.

Then explain the problem. 

Absolutely, and you don't need to. You can simply read all the cases on the linked-together sites I gave you, and then you can remember your failure when I asked you last time to provide even a single example of something good resulting from a belief in demons.

And none of these use a belief in the supernatural as justification for their vile actions. If they do, I have exactly the same problem with them, so yes, the examples of abuse do most certainly "work". The "basis for that understanding" are the facts I already stated.

The facts show that this "belief" has an exclusively negative effect. 

You don't have to be part of one to influence a person who is. In fact, in the Anneliese Michel case, the whole "demon possession" thing was first suggested by a christian friend, who later wasn't involved in the "exorcisms".

No, the cost would be just as imaginary as the belief itself. 

No, you would still have your belief in "demons" and "god", only nobody would pay the price for it, and you would still have the "supernatural protection" against just going out and abusing people that you apparently need.

It's a win-win, really, so please explain why you don't want to do it. 

Then find me the story for the "other side", whatever that may be. What I told you is a fact. A fact so disturbing that I really can't imagine what the "other side" might even be. Show me.

Yes, and that does not make the fictional character any more real.  

The bible is wide open to interpretation. Doesn't get more "christian" than that. It would be a less vile, less destructive interpretation. The christian religion can use some of those.

No, that is entirely true. When a disease has run it's course, the symptoms will abate.

So you don't want to do anything about one cause of abuse until it equals the number of abuses from all other all other causes combined ??????????

I already did. The passages are referenced on the page I linked you. 

Again, why even hand such people an excuse like that ?

A problem with my case but you don't buy it ? I'm sorry, what problem, and just exactly what don't you buy ? Like I said, if the crime was covered up, of course you would "buy it".

Why ? I can just give you a link to a page that mentions the parents' direct involvement in her injuries, and then you can simply admit the mistake you made in bringing this forward and declaring it a case of "real demonic possession", and not researching it properly. Like I said, there is no shame in that. You can, and should, only learn from your mistakes.

http://www.theologe.de/theologe9.htm

No, you are forgetting she died from dehydration and starvation. That would never have happened in care, so she would have had a chance.

Again, this is very strange. Why would the number of abuse cases inspired by "demonic possession" need to be greater than the combined number of cases from all other causes, before you drop this toxic belief ??? 

No, all I am doing is showing you the facts : These abuse cases happen frequently, and belief in "demonic possession" has exclusively negative consequences. So yes, by supporting this belief in "demonic possession" you are most certainly part of the problem, as the Anneliese Michel case also shows.

What's better than facts ? Tell me and I'll use it.

This just keeps getting stranger. Again, those weren't "excuses", every single case is a collection of undeniable facts. 

Well, yes. You would obviously be the person who believes in demons in this scenario.

Same problem. It would be an idiotic thing to say, seeing as how you still support the central idea that even inspired him to try in the first place.

Most certainly yes. Those rules even seem to change depending who you're talking to.

That makes the whole "demon possession" notion even more obviously fake. Apart from stubborn religious delusions, there is now no explanation left for your belief.

What scenario ? I supported my claim with facts. Many more than you bothered to read, it appears.

I quoted what he said verbatim ! That means I used his exact words !

But you just agreed there's nothing "fanatical" about asking for proof for a supernatural claim !! So why keep going on about "fanatical" proof ??????

But how could ANYONE claim to "misunderstand" a sentence when they first altered it themselves ???????? To even try something like that is absurdly dishonest !

He asked you to read what he wrote, instead of just changing it into something it wasn't ! On what planet is that "an excuse" ???

Do you really think you can just decide what does and doesn't matter in another person's sentence that's addressed to you ? If that were true than how can anyone even communicate with you, once you decide there's something you just don't want to hear ??

You did that eventually, yes, but you still tried to change it about 3 times ! Do you really not realize how amazingly absurd that was ? 

Give what up ? Confronting you with what you did ? Why, when you seem incapable of even admitting how incredibly strange and absurd it was ?

So do you promise never to do that again ? If so, I will happily "give up" mentioning it.

"Maybe" is not proof. If there's more to it than comic books, you seem strangely reluctant to produce the proof that can't be matched by any other "comic book" concept. So again, why then believe in demons ? 

 Meanwhile you seem quite happy to ignore the actual facts that expose your belief as entirely toxic. And that does not make any sense whatsoever.
 

No, and please learn this : "You don't understand the subject matter" is not proof either. "Subject matter" can be produced for ANYTHING.

No, and again, please learn this : "Subject matter" can be produced for ANY supernatural concept. 

If it doesn't then how can it keep you from believing everything ? And if it doesn't, THEN WHAT DOES ??

I never said you made it up. I simply repeated my statement from before since your reply wasn't relevant to it, and still isn't. 

Are you ever going to explain how ANYONE could think that taking out words from a sentence and rearranging what's left, would somehow not affect the meaning ?? Because that would be quite something to hear.

Eventually, After trying it a couple more times, sure. But it looks like he finally got what he was after. Not that you had any choice but to give it to him. 

Using X and X instead of actual words, that's what.

Untrue. I gave you more facts than you have bothered to read so far. As for Mouse, you made it so easy for him that he doesn't even need to do research. Not his fault.

Then read the facts I have provided, remember your failure to provide any facts that support your "side of it", and draw the only conclusion that is left to you. 

The problem with your accusations is that you can't back them up with facts. He can. 

"I think you're smarter than that...", "I think we both know that...",..

Seriously, does anyone EVER fall for that ?

Oh no, don't worry, I said "attempts". They failed completely, so unless they were simply meant to waste time, it's maybe best to stop trying.

Facts simply make discussions like this go smoother, so just those, thank you. 

EDIT: repeat post

Yes. Did you not notice how I said Emily Rose herself couldn't be evil? I meant that it is literally impossible for her to be accurately described by the word evil because of how said word is defined.

Entering the phrase "logically impossible" into an internet search engine should provide you with plenty more examples of what I'm talking about.

I find it interesting that you quickly dismiss the idea of an electrical problem but quickly accept the idea of a demon. The reality is that when wires become loose or frayed and connections become corroded that lights become very sensitive to vibrations caused by you walking or driving near them. I didn't think of it at first as my electrical experience is limited to being able to do basic wiring in my house, but it makes perfect sense that if the circuit is failing that even the slightest vibration could cause it to come and go. Any DIY site where they answer peoples electrical problems confirms that such vibration sensitive issues are not uncommon. 

http://ask.metafilter.com/103788/Randomly-extinguishing-light-fixture

http://diy.stackexchange.com/questions/12175/what-would-cause-a-bathroom-light-to-turn-off-during-operation

Oddly, none of the electricians suggested that demons might be the cause. You would think that electricians should be experts in demons that like to mess with electricity, since most of us call them when the lights act funky and we can't find the problem. Imagine the money that electricians could make referring customers with demon problems to exorcists...

it had been referenced many times... whether it was rational to pick one avenue as the only means for proof when there are many... specifically regarding the mercedes analogy... it's over, you finally had answered it, not without commentary however.

What I don't understand is how you can say that, then turn around and ask me to explain nonsense.  I get your irrational proof concept... it makes sense, but your angle of expectant proof is just like mine for only accepting that cars exist if someone buys me a mercedes... not rational.  You said so youself after a bit

no, you said it strait out... "I did look around.. no demons"  

it basically proves my point that if you don't know what to look for, you're never going to find it.  

How do you define disbelief in something that actually exists?

K  

Post #289 gives us the basis of the back and forth with the question where I asked:

caposkia wrote:

...so are you saying it's irrational?

Where you reply with the same answer as before:

Why not read what I write ? I said "cars aren't supernatural creatures".

Post # 294, after we've gone back and forth so much that you had forgotten what the question was I said:

caposkia wrote:

After reading what you said, I said the answer is not contingent on what the object or subject is. So yes or no?

Tell me what "it" refers to, so I can answer your question. 

that "trick" isn't supposed to derail you, in fact, it's suppose to put you on track... I say that because your approach to the subject is just like what they do in the sects... which is why you can never convince people in sects why what they think they know is wrong

I've noticed... Might you consider that if it's a trick, i'd likely try it no more than once... a good magician never does a trick more than once, someone might figure him out... also, if I've done it 3 times by now... maybe it's not me that's missing something or trying to avoid

Strait, without the runaround... if I was wrong... tell me strait and explain yourself becasue that would mean that i'm misinterpreting something from you

do you even know what that statement is referring to?  By your answer I would guess you haven't a clue.  About the car thing being rational.

yes, but you ran from the statement that claimed yours still wasn't based on rational grounds.. and there's a very clear explanation on why.  You can keep pointing fingers at me and redirecting the focus... I'll just keep refocusing the conversation to the very first post.  Once we can get past that, then we might step over your finish line.

Good to know.  thanks for being honest.  I'll just keep reposting my reply to your first post.  I'm sure it'll get boring after a while, but that's where we've been stuck.  I know you don't want to see it, but irrational proof is different than the proof seeming irrational until it is given.  

Really?  why can't you accept strait answers from me then?  I finally understood what you were saying about proof seeming irrational, but then you ran from the point that your avenue of proof didn't sit on the grounds of spiritual Law.  

I think it was very obvious that I was not understanding what he was saying, yet instead of trying to help, he started pointing fingers, blaming me for playing avoidance games among other rants.

my apologies... I must have been thinking of a different link... sorry

really?  It's a leader that wants everyone to do exactly as he wishes and when they get out of line, they're tortured and killed... what's to explain?

tell that to everyone who supports the Salvation Army

only if it's not real

The scenario I present is just as real... no God, no consequences if you can hide it.    I don't want to do it for the same reasons why you can't accept it

Just to be clear before I do, am I showing you a positive outcome for belief?  or a positive result of exorcism?

until you actually start looking at it in context.  

is that what I said?  How about what I was trying to say is why not start with the real problem first... that being those people who will use any excuse that works.... then tackle the individual excuses... E.g.  wouldn't you want to tackle the most common excuse for abuse, which is mismanagement of child behavior?

the belief as an excuse.  The abuse happens yes, but it is a minority when compared to the number of possession cases around the world... just as much as mental disorders and behavior issues.

I skimmed the link, but you'll have to point me to where in that extensive article they talked about physical abuse by others... I see where she abused herself and I also saw how the Catholic church misunderstood proper exorcism techniques... which might explain why it was so extensive... all in all, it looks like a drug overdose that the coroner said killed her.  I thought they had prevented her from getting drugs.  

you're associating the belief with the abuse when there would be a much much greater number of abuse cases if your conclusion was true.  What you're asking me to do is drop a belief in something I believe is real.  Why stop believing the grass is green when it is?  Some people might get abused becasue someone else doesn't want them to think that way, but that's not an excuse for ignoring reality

logic and reasoning within context of facts

by that conclusion, then colds are fake as well... people just need to suck it up and stop believing they're sick

then i must have missed it or forgotten that I had read it amidst his banter.

its' what you're asking for... that's fanatical.  It's like me asking you to prove to me cars are real by showing me a flying car... cars don't fly so it's fanatical.  

the part in question was making an assumption of how I'd react to it and not a part directed.. regardless I did reply still with everything in tact... and here you are still trying to blame me for changing it... that boat has long since sailed.

Give up the redundant excuses and deterrents from the topic... The whole conversation is incredibly strange and absurd.
 

what facts???? the abuse stories?  Are you suggesting we should get rid of everything that can be associated with abuse?  Do you realize what you're proposing?

logic and reason

one word.. notating... a college technique... btw.. I realize what is being said just now... I did take words out... words that only had to do with how I felt about it, but I never rearranged the words, i put them exactly the way they were... I challenge you to show me how I changed them.  I challenge you to show everyone how the words I took out could change teh whole meaning of the statement in question... I want to see this, it's obvious you're not letting it go, so let's bring it out in the open. 

he hasn't presented any facts.. what facts are you talking about?

fall for what?  facts are facts... isn't that what we're discussing here?

if you remember I had said that i did not quickly conclude it was demons... it was hind sight.  I had taken into consideration also the cycling and the possibility of faulty wiring.  that works for maybe 2 or 3 in the same area night after night, but doesn't account for the rest

since when was an electrician a demonologist?  why not call a plumber up next time my car breaks down while I'm at it

How many times ??? Not only was that a false analogy, it was trying to defend an argument you already gave up ! 

Well duh !

Yeah, somewhere in this reply, I'm going to have to explain the bleeding obvious yet again, aren't I ? Okay then, if you insist.

So now you're trying to substitute "irrational" with "nonsense". Sorry, not going to work. You already admitted you can see that, say it with me now, how proof required to turn fantasy into reality is going to seem irrational before someone produces it.

So of course, it's also going to seem like nonsense before someone produces it. 

So produce it, or admit there is no proof.

Again, you're using a textbook false analogy ! We're not talking about cars ! We're talking about supernatural creatures that YOU believe in !

It wouldn't be acceptable evidence. We've been through this many times already.

That would depend on the "something that actually exists".

?? How could I even know it really was a "yes or no" question when I forgot what you were even going on about ?

And this AGAIN is about that false analogy ! 

You just pulled exactly the same trick again. I could make exactly the same idiotic comment about you.

Also, you're assuming I'm "off track".

At this point, tricks are all you have, so you might as well keep 'em coming. And it's 4 times now, I guess. Meh, not really worth counting.

Fine, but promise you'll listen, okay ? Because this has been repeated almost as much as the "irrational proof" thing.

Capitals ? Yeah, capitals : YOUR CARS ANALOGY IS A FALSE ANALOGY.

"Strait" enough for you ? 

False analogy ! And you already admitted what your false analogy was trying to deny ! 

What "statement" ? I hope this isn't still about your false analogy, because I'd like something new to debunk, please. 

If there's something in "the very first post" that I haven't already dealt with repeatedly, then tell me what it is, instead of just referencing it.

But your reply to my first post doesn't even address the point where we ended up, which is here :

You admitting that you can see how proof required to turn fantasy into reality would seem "irrational", which was your entire problem with my acceptable proof.

So we're not really stuck anymore. We're just waiting for you to produce the proof (which you admitted only seems irrational, because it hasn't been produced yet), or admit there isn't any.

Because that's what "getting stuck" at this point would mean.

And what we're dealing with here is proof you haven't given us yet, so that's all we have.

Because your answers don't always make sense, and I've explained why.

Thanks again for that. Hope you're not regretting it too much.

Nope, did no such thing. I explained why invoking "spiritual law" doesn't work. It would be trying to justify nonsense with even more nonsense.

So.....any acceptable proof coming soon, or are you ready to admit there is none ? 

And yet exorcisms have been around for an extraordinarily long time. Why do you suppose that no one has conducted any kind of structured test to determine which techniques work and those that do not? 

Do you have any cases where the person performing the exorcism was injured? I have seen hundreds where the person being victimized by the exorcism was injured or died. If anyone attempted to perform an exorcism on me, I promise you they would be severely injured if I was physically capable. When you torture people they have a tendency to get violent.

http://whatstheharm.net/exorcisms.html  

But I am sure all of those people were "doing it wrong". Which brings me back to my two questions, why can't you find the "right" way online and why haven't any of these so called experts conducted a study to determine which methods of exorcism work and which don't? I can find studies on which torture techniques work online, I can find studies on which firefighting methods work best online, but I can't find anyone doing a comparative analysis of exorcisms. I find a thousand different methods and the vast majority of them lead to prolonged suffering from the victim and everything ranging from minor injuries to death. 

Why should I associate demons with them when there are perfectly provable rational explanations? Whether or not I eat tonight has nothing to do with a demon, it has to do with whether or not I can obtain, cook and consume food. God gave us food????? Are you fucking serious? You do know that food doesn't magically appear in the grocery store right? A lot of people spend their whole lives doing nothing but creating food and distributing it to your local grocer.

Our recent situation of surplus food is very modern, and due to something called the industrial revolution which led to great technology like tractors that allow one person's labor to produce substantial amounts of food. The other 1900 years since Christ supposedly saved humanity consisted of regular food shortages, consistent malnutrition and extreme difficulty for most people to feed themselves. Until recently, there was not enough food to feed everyone in the world. Today, we have enough, but we still have significant distribution problems, particularly in countries that do not enjoy our level of technology.

I am someone who hunts and slaughters almost all of my protein. I can assure you that all the time I have spent in the woods, God never helped. The schmuck wasn't there to help me track, stalk or shoot. He even skipped out on the field dressing, carrying and butchering later on. The deadbeat isn't even there when I cook it. Rather than thanking God for your food, perhaps you should take a little time to thank all the people who raise the animals, plant the crops and generally bust their ass doing jobs that are not exactly pleasant just so you can eat without having to put a significant amount of your own time into it.   

Why would the news report on it? As I pointed out, streetlights going out is a frequent occurrence that happens every single day to millions of streetlights. It would be like the news reporting on batteries dying (which btw has nothing to do with demons either). 

Well since it happens everywhere that there are streetlights it is not a surprise that you saw it in various locations. The point is that it doesn't happen to those people in particular. It happens to everyone. Just most of us don't pay any attention because it is not all that remarkable. It is not uncommon that people adjust to regular disturbances in their environment to the point where they no longer notice them, such as lights that go out and come back on, sounds, smells, etc. What is uncommon is noticing such things and attributing the responsibility to demons.

Did you call an electrician?

When your electricity doesn't work you call an electrician, so I imagine that electricians would recognize that it is not in fact an electrical problem and refer you to an exorcist, just like an electrician might refer you to an exterminator if the electrical problem is being caused by an infestation of mice. Their job is to fix the electricity regardless of what is causing the problem, or at least be capable of referring you to someone who can fix the problem. 

If all it takes is a car, I will buy you a car in exchange for equally tangible and equally unquestionable proof of demons. Your analogy utterly fails, because I can purchase you a car, the only question is whether I am willing to do so- which I would consider indisputable proof of demons well worth the value of a car. Exactly what evidence of demons could you provide us that would be the equivalent of me purchasing you that car? 

I guess I dont' know for sure... I'm just not aware of any.  Are you suggesting you have something?

Probably the same reason why you can't find "the right way" to do at home brain surgury online.  As you said, exorcisms have been around for centuries.  I believe the methods are tried and true... not to say many are ignorant of those ways.  We are aware of the publicized cases... why were they publicized?  Because something went wrong... othewise, there's not much of a story to tell huh.  What's the fun in covering a story on a successful case?

Torture techniques are not appropriate.  Read the Bible.  Jesus exorcised demons from people... this would be a very simple direct explanation of how to do a proper exorcism.  Yes, it's really that simple if you are in the right spirit and knowledge from what I understand.  

Seriously?  i think you're smart, so you'll likely understand this... just because something has a rational explanation doesn't mean that explanation is the cause.  The most common reason is not always the right reason.  There are sometimes many factors involved.

God is not anywhere He's not invited to be.  and I always am thankful for all those people who provide my food... including my uncle who has given us meat, my wife who bakes the bread, the local farmers who provide us with produce etc.  

this would be to the extreme of them not working appropriately.  yes, they go out, but if it happened as mentioned to everyone, we'd have quite a light show to watch.

are you suggesting then that I all of a sudden stopped paying attention... when my friend prayed about it?  I haven't noticed it since... other than the typical streetlight blinkout that I see maybe once or twice a year.

about streetlights on a random street?  I figured if it was an issue beyond just happenign to me, the residents of that street would call them.

In my experience, if they come and find nothing wrong, they will say; "I can't find anything wrong".. charge me a fortune and leave... if they found evidence of chewed wires, I'm sure they'd have grounds to tell me to hire an exterminator... Demons as far as I am aware dont' chew wires.  

I am suggesting that your excuse the reason they don't have information on exorcism techniques online is because exorcisms are dangerous is bullshit. 

Except I can. http://journals.lww.com/neurosurgery/pages/default.aspx I can find brain surgery techniques, their success rates and often including detailed pictures and videos. Many of them are available for free, some of the newer articles I would have to pay a few bucks for. And this is just one of several neurosurgery professional journals available online where neurosurgeons share their techniques, describe them in detail and evaluate how well they work. Where is similar information on exorcisms available? Is there a professional exorcism journal somewhere? 

Ok, well show me a case where it was done "correctly" and show me someone who has gone through the effort to compare exorcism techniques for effectiveness.

Why create an explanation that has no evidence supporting it when there is a perfectly mundane explanation? I imagine you assume that I am typing to you right now using a keyboard and you have no reason to suspect otherwise because me using a keyboard is a perfectly rational explanation of how I am communicating so there is no reason to believe that I have a demon possessing me and I am interacting with the computer through a demon. If I claimed that I had found a way to interact directly with my computer using only my mind, without touching a keyboard, you would be rational to be skeptical until I furnished some proof that I did in fact invent that technology. Until you have evidence that suggests otherwise, there is no rational reason for you to believe anything other than the mundane explanation that I am using a keyboard. 

So what did God have to do with it? People who don't invite God also get meat, bake bread and grow crops. People who believe in God do not have more than people who do not.

Maybe your luck changed. It is a random event and you went through a period where you witnessed a random event more frequently than expected, so what? One of my hobbies is playing poker and it was raining today so I went to the casino. I played for about 9 hours and was dealt the hand Ace King 8+ times. The odds of getting that hand are 1 in 82 so on average I should have expected to see it twice the entire day, instead I saw it far more frequently. It happens. Next time I play I might not see that hand the whole day, or who knows maybe my "luck" might continue. There is no reason to imagine that some demon was influencing the cards (and yes it would be a demon because I lost with AK every time except once) Probability is just a mathematical estimation, not a guarantee. That is why some people might win the big lottery multiple times in their life, even though the odds are that any person is unlikely to win a big lottery even once in their lives. 

Maybe they did. How would you know? You said you ruled out electrical problems. How do you rule out electrical problems without calling someone to check it? I imagine you didn't climb up and disassemble it yourself to take a look. 

If I had a problem with my electricity and they didn't fix it I wouldn't pay them and hire a new electrician. I have never witnessed an electrical problem where the problem couldn't be found. Do you have evidence of any significant number of electrical problems that electricians can't solve?

Demanding to see a car is rather extreme, but hardly irrational. If you were talking to someone in one of the many remote tribes in Brazil who have never seen that type of technology, it would be perfectly rational for them to doubt your stories until they have seen it. The only reason you consider it irrational is because you live in a modern country and everyone you know has seen cars on a daily basis for most of their lives. It is irrational to demand proof when you have already have seen that same proof a million times. If you had never seen a car in your life, I don't think it is irrational at all to demand to see one as proof. 

It would certainly help. I would consider it preferable that someone more experienced than me in the medical field saw someone who was possessed and was able to run tests on the person. 

Yes, if it came from reliable sources.

Yes, if they were reliable sources. This is precisely what I asked for and you have failed to produce. 

Not in the slightest. The bible has numerous assertions that have been proven wrong so I do not consider it a reliable source. 

? I'm sorry, are you dyslexic ? That would explain a lot, but you should have said. 

And if you're not and you're just attempting to insult Mouse somehow, I have to tell you, it's a pretty desperate attempt. 

I think you have trouble understanding people when they don't give you the "correct" answers and questions.

No, sorry, but you already admitted yourself that you don't settle for just "belief". "Believers" never do, which is why paranoid, authoritarian regimes as the one you mentioned like to nip that in the bud. There really couldn't care less what you "believe". Nobody does. It's what you people end up doing that we care about, like your silly "exorcisms".

We're talking about belief in "demonic possession". Please try to stick with the subject, no matter how unpleasant it is.

Because fiction is all there is, and all the symptoms of people exposed to these silly rituals are treatable. 

Do you still not understand ? 

Because a supernatural claim is a supernatural claim. It doesn't matter where the fiction comes from, fiction it remains.

Do you understand now why there is no cost, and why you have no excuse ? 

I will refrain from making any sarcastic comments regarding religious "faith" somehow disapproving of dishonesty (I'm not even sure it would be sarcasm), but you're going to have to explain this one : What could possibly be dishonest about keeping your faith, but not openly supporting it, so it can't be taken as support for people who tragically, or purposefully, "misunderstand" it ? I mean, even a chance to save an actual life, that still wouldn't be enough to drop this exclusively destructive belief ?

Think very carefully before answering. You might reveal more of your personality than you wish to. 

It has been adequately and tirelessly explained to you why anything else would be completely worthless.

No, people change their behavior without belief in religious nonsense, never mind "demons".  Again, ... something positive that could not have occurred without it.

And whether or not someone is considered "knowledgeable" about such things, is once again, a matter of interpretation. That's all you have when you're trying to distill meaning from these ancients religious texts.

What you will be "shut down" by, is someone with more charisma than you.

No, that wasn't a "try". That was an accurate assessment of your favorite fallacy.

You were. I was talking about the insane belief in supernatural creatures. Again, stick with the subject, please.

Please do try not to misrepresent what I say. I will be as clear as possible : The belief in "demons" and "possession" is the cause of these insane "exorcisms", which has lead to many deaths and who-knows how many severely emotionally and psychologically damaged people, and nothing else. Therefore, this belief can be justly described as being exclusively toxic, and it needs to be discarded, as all other insane myths have been.

No, any decision made on the basis of belief in "demons" and "possession" would be at best completely useless, and at worst a horrible, cowardly crime. 

And again, if they were simply a more skilled bullshit artist than you are, they would have no trouble convincing you they were more "knowledgeable" than you in such matters, and you would go along with it. (That is, if you REALLY believe this nonsense)

You already have : Every single reported case. Every single one.

You cannot "correct" something by making a false analogy. A fallacy is not a reasonable argument. If you accuse somebody of making a "false claim", you need to prove that was indeed the case. You did not. 

Is it not then abuse, in your book, to make a person with broken knees kneel repeatedly ???

Considering the damning facts in this case, that's going to be quite the balancing act.

??????????

Do you have any reason, ANY reason at all, to pick the supernatural explanation, when there's a perfectly rational one staring you in the face so hard that even you notice it ??? 

For the sake of argument, I'm going to assume you really don't know why that doesn't make any sense whatsoever. I'll explain : Simply mentioning a supernatural explanation for something doesn't make it any more likely than ANYTHING your imagination can come up with ! So no, you can't "consider the possibility for a moment that both could be true", because that would be a waste of time !

Again, simply spouting supernatural nonsense doesn't make it magically real ! The rational explanation is ALL THAT'S REALLY THERE ! 

Many parts, yes. For one, you missed the part where not giving a sick person the care they so obviously need, also counts as abuse, and worse, since it led to her death. 

And her youth shows quite clearly how all this "belief" can utterly destroy a person. 

? I don't understand. Did I not show you all those linked pages, and do you not support belief in "demons" and "possession" ?

Then they have had the good idea not to take your "demon" and "possession" nonsense seriously, or they have not been allowed near children and sick people.

You still don't understand. I'll explain again : You are actively and openly supporting this exclusively toxic belief, without shame (which is incredible in itself). Believe it or not, but that DOES influence people. People you are unaware of and can't stop when they take this insane belief to it's logical conclusion. You have a responsibility here, and you simply do not seem to care. 

No, once again, that was not a "try". You obviously have trouble even grasping the concept of a false analogy, so I will take my time to explain this yet again :

One of the "somethings" being what it is, was something that doesn't actually exist. Therefore you were trying to draw, once again, parallels between reality and fiction. You can not just presuppose your fiction is real just to make an analogy work.

I have a feeling this won't be the last time I, or other people, will have to explain this.

?

Because that is not what we're addressing here. I'm not sure how you keep missing the actual subject of the conversation. Do I need to repeat it more ? 

This is untrue, since you keep picking the supernatural explanation, when there's a perfectly good rational one.

Yes, but I would prefer we concentrate on where it should end : Namely you making a habit of ignoring silly and dangerous supernatural nonsense, in favor of the always available rational explanation. That really is not much to ask of anyone.

No, you made a suggestion that you didn't bother to back up with facts. That is not "making a point".

No, once again, you were comparing cold symptoms to symptoms of "demonic possession". Please stop trying to draw parallels between reality and fiction. 

As explained, if you were allowed to simply presuppose your fiction into existence, then there would be no such thing as a false analogy, and anyone could construct valid arguments for anything their imagination could produce. Reality does not work like that. If it did, we'd be up to our eyeballs in supernatural creatures. 

Again, you do not seem to understand this very simple thing : There is as much proof for the existence of "demons" and "possession" as ANYTHING your imagination can produce. In fact, you could take what you consider "proof" for "demons" and "possession" and give it an entirely different supernatural explanation, and it would make just as much sense ! Yes, your "proof" is THAT worthless ! 

And I told you I never made such a suggestion. Please don't pretend you don't understand that that means "no". 

But what you consider proof is no such thing, so no, you do not demand proof at all.

Actually, yes, and I'm not the only one. 

That would be the person who prefers the supernatural explanation when there's a perfectly good rational one available. And let's be honest, if your life was on the line, you would ALWAYS pick the rational one. 

People keep shoving reality in your face, and you keep ignoring it in favor of silly and dangerous fiction, so no, they have not failed.

Also, you did not answer the question : How do you keep from believing everything, if you were to always apply the standards that allow you to believe in "demons" and "possession" ? 

There is nothing wrong with his request for proof, and you have finally admitted it. Now we just wait for you to produce it, or admit there is none. 

No, I say that as someone who's stating a simple fact. 

Of course you did. What else were you supposed to do. Produce acceptable proof for your insane supernatural claim ? 

You forgot the part where he explained why it does. He's been repeating that for quite a while now. If you don't understand, you need to tell him.

Then try to read what he actually says the first time he says it, so he won't have to repeat it. And tell him when you don't understand something, so he doesn't have to keep asking you.

Heh, actually, everyone here you discuss this with is going to end up at the same point as you and Mouse are now, so he's the one who took the shortcut. Everyone else has been humoring you, for their own amusement, mostly. They know it takes longer, but your claim is so fundamentally absurd, that it can be fully exposed no matter what approach we take. 

What is odd is that anyone would take "we both know that..." as a guarantee that whatever may follow will magically become common knowledge. Like I said, nobody falls for that. 

Now there's an odd statement. "Facts on spiritual discussion" ??? Sorry, but he's right. That's simply trying to justify nonsense with even more nonsense. 

Again, he hasn't needed any "excuses". Try to bring some facts to accompany your next weird accusations, please. Thank you.

I obviously didn't, hence my mentioning Mouse's explanation of why your "facts" don't qualify as such.

the explanation I got from you is because it's the only proof that I can't fake... a flying car is something you can't fake in real life too, but you can't do it without dramatically changing the dynamics of the car.  either way, it doesn't make it a logical reasoning.  I'm also NOT asking you to allow "me" to decide... but there are ways things work.  Cars don't fly and I can't escort a demon to your house... I misplaced Solomon's ring

Oh, so you know how it all works?!  then you'll have to explain it to me.  this is an aspect of the spiritual world I'm not as familar with if in fact what you ask is possible.

yea, but how does it change the answer here?  this just in case we're getting lost again is about rationality in asking for proof in comparison to the car analogy

because, if you answered it with a simple yes or no to begin with, you wouldn't have had that problem!  

Ah!  I'm starting to see the importance of repetition now

you might have to, because i've already explained why your false analogy excuse fails

only if you're trying to get noticed.  I've already told you that i wasn't comparing demons to cars and yet here you are saying that i'm comparing demons to cars.  who doesn't read the posts before responding again??? I think I forgot

.... oh?!  

you had inspired me

I dont' understand where you got the idea that "I" decided the rules.  Do some homework on the subject for a change

it is justified to demand proof... that was never the issue... the issue is you trying to write the rules for the subject.  you have decided the only way is your way and if that can't be shown than it's false.  you're doing the exact thing you just accused me of doing which is "why you don't get to decide what would be acceptable proof for your imaginary creatures"  (quoted from this post)

Sorry, but it most certainly DOES work that way. I already explained why, but if you missed it (You seem to be quite good at that), then tell me and I'll explain again. 

Ok, so we have a legitimately researched article on exorcism. Unfortunately, it only studies the historic practice of exorcism and belief in demons, not the actual existence of demons. In fact, it suggests that the earliest Christians did not think that exorcisms were necessary. 

Then we have an article about the increasing number of exorcism being performed. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-78847028.html I don't know if you paid for access to the site but I did so I will provide a few excerpts.

Those sneaky little demons. The article claims that there are thousands of exorcisms preformed every year. Yet still, not one person has bothered doing any kind of scientific study of possession and whenever a real scientist arrives, (or even a real reporter) those demons go into hiding. 

Then you have people like Bob Larson

Over the radio? Lol. I hope you don't believe that? You would think that serious experts in demonic possession would be out there collecting evidence to prove this man is a scam artist making money off of people. 

Ok, so we have an excerpt written by a guy clearly attempting to sell books, so let us see what he has to say about the case. Allegations of some pretty weird stuff happening. And then enters JB Rhine a scientist who made his name attempting to study ESP who was apparently quite happy to see if he could get some solid evidence of demons.... 

(By the way, Rhine's "other experimental results" were also failures and the results of his experiments have been thoroughly debunked) Unfortunately for Rhine, suddenly nothing was wrong with the boy so he didn't get any evidence. Funny how those demons just disappear when someone looking to collect experimental data shows up. Sneaky little buggers. So the minister determines that it must be demonic possession. And off to St. Louis where the exorcism happens and solves everything.

Great, we have some details here that we can verify which will certainly lend some credibility.

Huh, so it never happened and was simply made up by someone who wanted to sell books. Stupid skeptics looking at things like reality. But our intrepid author isn't going to let it rest at that. Sure, this part of the story turned out to be completely fraudulent, but you skeptics can't explain this other bullshit! (We can make it up faster than you can debunk it!)

Wow, this poor kid had words spontaneously being branded all over his body. He had the word "LOUIS" on his rib cage, "NO" on his wrists and a large "N" on each leg. Yet somehow,

WHAT?!?!?!? The doctor said the boy was "normal"? Last time I checked, having words branded on you was not normal. Did the doctor somehow miss those? Why weren't the police called? Something about this story doesn't add up.

So we have more stories of weird stuff happening with the boy, all of it testimony and much of it second or third hand. But our author assures skeptics like me that there is evidence,

Aha! So you have a verifiable piece of evidence. We can check that the family did in fact move across the country, because no one would do that for any reason other than demons!

Then we have more unverified stories of skin brandings (those demons certainly have a love of graffiti), levitating etc. Funny how none of that stuff happens in the days of video.

So they start the exorcism- the physical evidence witnessed by the nurses at the hospital was the boys screams, vomit and he pissed himself a lot. (Because we all know that when you strap a boy to a bed and yell at him in latin for hours at a time it is unusual for him to cry and when you don't let the kid go to the bathroom it is unusual for them to piss themselves)

More brands and welts appeared on him. Funny how in modern times every time someone gets branded in an exorcism we find out that the person performing the exorcism actually created it. Stupid video cameras. Makes me wonder whether these were sick fucks torturing the kid or if they simply made up the story. I really hope it is the latter.

Do you have any evidence of someone spontaneously getting brands on their skin? That is something that is observable but I have never seen an article in a medical journal about words being spontaneously branded on skin.

Regardless, the exorcism failed, they drag the kid into church, force him to convert to Catholicism, he is narrowly prevented from committing suicide and they decide to try another exorcism. This time they force him to hold a crucifix and five people hold him down while the priest recites prayers in Latin for
"hours" (how would you respond if someone did that to you? I would get pretty damn violent). If we did that to prisoners of war it would be called torture. Indeed, it is very similar to a torture technique that we use where the subject is restrained and forced to listen to loud music for hours being deprived of sleep and forced to sit in their own urine.    

All we have to support this story are the stories recalled by people. Some of which can be demonstrably proven to be false because they make claims that can be objectively verified and others which there is no way to verify one way or the other. What we know, is that the stories of the people involved are all different.

So is Father Halloran a liar? 

Exactly my point. Even if I tell you that I am not using a keyboard you assume a mundane explanation based on the technology that you know exists rather than assume it is a demon or that I can somehow interact with my computer telepathically. There is no reason for you to assume anything other than a mundane explanation. So why do you want me to accept an extraordinary explanation for things that happen in the world when there are perfectly plausible mundane explanations?