Top 10 Incorrupt Corpses
Published on August 21, 2007 - 138 Comments
Throughout the years the Roman Catholic Church has found the bodies of some of their saints to be incorrupt. When this happens, the body is often put on display (quite often they are put inside a Church altar with a glass front). This is a list of the most famous incorrupt saints.
1. Saint Bernadette of Lourdes, Died 1879 [Wikipedia]
St Bernadette was born Bernadette Soubirous in Lourdes, France. From February to July 1858, she reported eighteen apparitions of “a Lady.” Despite initial skepticism from the Roman Catholic Church, these claims were eventually declared to be worthy of belief after a canonical investigation. After her death, Bernadette’s body remained “incorruptible”, and the shrine at Lourdes went on to become a major site for pilgrimage, attracting millions of Catholics each year.
2. Saint John Vianney, Died 1859 [Wikipedia]
St. Jean Baptiste Marie Vianney (May 8, 1786 - August 4, 1859) was a French parish priest who became a Catholic saint and the patron saint of parish priests. He is often referred to, even in English, as the “Curé d’Ars” (the parish priest of the village of Ars). He became famous internationally for his priestly and pastoral work in his parish due to the radical spiritual transformation of the community and its surroundings.
3. Saint Teresa Margaret, Died 1770
n March 19, 1934, Pope Pius XI entered Blessed Teresa Margaret of the Sacred Heart in the register of saints. In Germany, the new saint is virtually unknown outside of the Carmelite Order. Her life was quiet and hidden. She died on March 7, 1770 at the age of 22, and of this short lifespan, she spent five years in the Carmelite monastery in Florence. She performed no brilliant, attention-getting deeds, nor did her reputation reach the wider world. She spent her life living quietly and with virtue.
4. Saint Vincent de Paul, Died 1660 [Wikipedia]
Saint Vincent de Paul studied humanities at Dax with the Cordeliers and he graduated in theology at Toulouse. Vincent de Paul was ordained in 1600, remaining in Toulouse until he went to Marseille for an inheritance. On his way back from Marseille, he was taken captive by Turkish pirates to Tunis, and sold into slavery. After converting his owner to Christianity, Vincent de Paul was freed in 1607. Vincent returned to France and served as priest in a parish near Paris. n 1705 the Superior-General of the Lazarists requested that the process of his canonization might be instituted. On August 13, 1729, Vincent was declared Blessed by Benedict XIII, and canonized by Clement XII on June 16, 1737. In 1885 Leo XIII gave him as patron to the Sisters of Charity.
5. Saint Silvan Died circa 350
There is little known about Saint Silvan except that he was martyred (killed for his faith). Considering his body is over 1,600 years old, it is remarkably preserved.
6. Saint Veronica Giuliani, Died 1727 [Wikipedia]
Saint Veronica Giuliani (Veronica de Julianis) (1660-July 9, 1727) was an Italian mystic. She was born at Mercatello in the Duchy of Urbino. Her parents, Francesco Giuliana and Benedetta Mancini, were both of gentle birth. In baptism she was named Ursula. According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, she showed signs of sanctity from an early age. Her legend states that she was only eighteen months old, she uttered her first words to upbraid a shopman who was serving a false measure of oil, saying distinctly: “Do justice, God sees you.”
7. Saint Zita, Died 1272 [Wikipedia]
Saint Zita (c. 1212 - 27 April 1272) is the patron saint of maids and domestic servants. She is also appealed to in order to help find lost keys. Zita often said to others that devotion is false if slothful. She considered her work as an employment assigned her by God, and as part of her penance, and obeyed her master and mistress in all things as being placed over her by God. She always rose several hours before the rest of the family and employed in prayer a considerable part of the time which others gave to sleep.
8. Saint John Bosco, Died 1888 [Wikipedia]
Saint Don Bosco, born Giovanni Melchiorre Bosco, and known in English as John Bosco (August 16, 1815 – January 31, 1888), was an Italian Catholic priest, educator and recognized pedagogue, who put into practice the dogma of his religion, employing teaching methods based on love rather than punishment. He placed his works under the protection of Francis de Sales; thus his followers styled themselves the Salesian Society. He is the only Saint with the title “Father and Teacher of Youth”.
9. Blessed Pope Piux IX, Died 1878 [Wikipedia]
Pope Pius IX (May 13, 1792 – February 7, 1878), born Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti, reigned as Pope of the Roman Catholic Church from his election in June 16, 1846, until his death more than 31 years later in 1878. Pius IX was elected as the candidate of the liberal and moderate wings on the College of Cardinals, following the pontificate of arch-conservative Pope Gregory XVI. Initially sympathetic to democratic and modernizing reforms in Italy and in the Church, Pius became increasingly conservative after he was deposed as the temporal ruler of the Papal States in the events that followed the Revolutions of 1848.
10. Blessed Pope John XXIII, Died 1963 [Wikipedia]
Pope John XXIII (Latin: Ioannes PP. XXIII; Italian: Giovanni XXIII), born Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli (November 25, 1881 – June 3, 1963), was elected as the 261st Pope of the Catholic Church and sovereign of Vatican City on October 28, 1958. He called the Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) but did not live to see it to completion, dying on June 3, 1963, two months after the completion of his final encyclical, Pacem in Terris. He was beatified on September 3, 2000, along with Pope Pius IX, the first popes since Pope St. Pius X to receive this honour.
Technorati Tags: corpse, incorrupt, saints
Related ListsTop 10 Bizarre Death Related Things You Can Buy OnlineTop 10 Astonishing Miracles 5 Reasons That We Love Cheesy Horror Movies Top 10 Historical Monsters |
SubscriptionsLike this article? Subscribe to the RSS feed to keep 'em coming, or subscribe via email: |
If you find this site helpful, please leave a donation so you can enjoy the spirit of giving too.
Email This Post
1. mix2323 - August 21st, 2007 at 10:25 pm
wow cool don’t know what else to say
2. rope - August 21st, 2007 at 11:16 pm
from Wikipedia: “…although the body of Pope John XXIII remains in a remarkably intact state, after its discovery, Church officials quickly pointed out that the pope’s body had been embalmed and that there was a lack of oxygen in his sealed triple coffin, lest the public mistakenly fall under the impression that John’s body had been incorrupt due to supernatural reasons.”
3. James - August 22nd, 2007 at 12:24 am
i fell kind of dumb asking but,whats an incorrupt body.
4. Emily - August 22nd, 2007 at 2:21 am
James, I wondered the same thing.
5. Fe - August 22nd, 2007 at 2:58 am
James, Emily, incorruptables are exactly what they sound like - their bodies don’t corrupt or decompose. To believers, it’s a sign of god’s grace.
6. Liz - August 22nd, 2007 at 3:05 am
that’s really something
7. Sandra - August 22nd, 2007 at 3:42 am
so are those pictures what their bodies actually look like right now? I always thought that they had just naturally mummified. I thought that they would all look like #7. St. Zida?
8. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 8:54 am
rope: it is true that John XXIII was embalmed - I think he was the first Pope to be embalmed in fact. But I think his body has been in the open air for over a year now with no effect so it is probably that he is incorrupt. Time will tell for sure. It is important to note that most people who are buried are embalmed - it doesn’t stop the corruption of the body, it just slows it.
9. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 8:55 am
Sandra: that is what they look like now - which makes the 1,600 year old one even more incredible. And St Bernadette is incredible too. You can go to the Churches that the bodies are in and see them anytime.
10. Asta - August 22nd, 2007 at 10:39 am
lol and to think im catholic school educated ,they didnt teach us this , or maybe it was one of the days i wagged or spent in the head nun’s office
Truly amazing and interesting.thx
11. Kelsi - August 22nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
Wow, that’s amazing, I hadn’t heard of this phenomon. Being largely skeptical of the church by nature, what are the arguements against it?
12. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 11:50 am
Kelsi: there aren’t any really - I guess sceptics would just say that it is a naturally occurring phenomenon that happens occasionally.
BTW everyone: excuse the funny ordering of the comments - I changed the timezone of the site today - all should be well by the end of the day.
13. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 11:56 am
Asta: you are welcome! I think this sort of thing is much more widely known in Europe as most of the Saint’s above are from there. It would certainly make an interesting basis for a European tour!
14. Dan - August 22nd, 2007 at 12:04 pm
# 5 is insane…I’ve seen the first one, but never knew there were more like it. Great list!
15. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Dan: yeah - you can even see the wound that killed him. How incredible is that.
16. Andre du Plessis - August 22nd, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Ok someone’s got to say it :
“I see dead people.”
17. Marcy - August 22nd, 2007 at 1:17 pm
The photo of St. Bernadette is a bit misleading. From the Wikipedia article:
“A precise imprint of the face was molded so that the firm of Pierre Imans in Paris could make a light wax mask based on the imprints and on some genuine photos. This was common practice for relics in France, as it was feared that although the body was mummified, the blackish tinge to the face and the sunken eyes and nose would make an unpleasant impression on the public. Imprints of the hands were also taken for the presentation of the body.”
Though I do agree that it is an amazing phenomenon. I’m surprised that I’d never heard of it before.
18. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Andre: haha - well done
19. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Marcy: that is true - though it is only a light wax film used in the same way makeup would but much longer lasting.
20. christian - August 22nd, 2007 at 9:15 pm
I was going to mention the wax look of St. Bernadette. Dont you think thats a bit vain of the church to keep the living beauty intact in such a way? Who’s to say what sort of decay underneath would have occured by now. #4 has a similiar waxen look. I notice they are all sealed too. Anyway I’m not debunking, considering the age of the saint’s remains.
21. jfrater - August 22nd, 2007 at 10:48 pm
christian: I think that it is considered a miracle regardless, but as so many people flock to see the bodies, they are on constant display and need protection from the light and air - incorruptibility does not protect against air-born funguses for example. The wax serves this purpose. They are definitely not corrupting underneath - if so - the smell would give it away.
22. Briarrose1 - August 23rd, 2007 at 4:26 pm
I can’t get over how they are so well kept, especailly the one that is 1600 years old.
23. B - August 23rd, 2007 at 4:29 pm
These are a little creepy. But I would love to actually see them, not for faith based reasons, but just because they’re so odd. I’ve never heard of this before, but it seems like a really strange practice.
/Throughout the years the Roman Catholic Church has found the bodies of some of their saints to be incorrupt./
But how are the bodies found to incorrupt?
24. jfrater - August 24th, 2007 at 12:21 am
Briarrose1: I agree - amazing.
B: In the cases of the older ones, it is sometimes discovered when the bodies must be moved to a different place for protection. In modern cases the Church routinely opens coffins of people that have had miraculous lives 50 years after their death. It is not a case of finding by mistake and making the person a saint, but rather checking to see whether a saintly person has also been protected from corruption in death. The case of St Bernadette was interesting - not only did she not corrupt, but her body after death exuded the smell of roses for a long time. I am not sure if it still does.
25. Gr8flDdFn - August 24th, 2007 at 2:53 am
whoa… i’d love to see some of these in person.
26. jfrater - August 24th, 2007 at 3:39 am
Gr8flDdFn: It is probably not hard to organize if you are going on holiday to Europe.
27. Kelsey - August 25th, 2007 at 9:41 am
I didn’t drop by Mao’s tomb in Tianenmen square, but I heard Mao is laying there looking a lot like a wax figure… which could actually be the case a-la ripley’s believe it or not.
28. jfrater - August 25th, 2007 at 11:47 am
Kelsey: he was preserved intentionally to preserve the memory of the revolution. I am sure that left to nature, he would have rotted quite promptly!
29. Bob S. - August 26th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Amazing that so many of you accept this without question.
Discovery channel had a show a while back where scientists checked these bodies. While the church did not allow all of them to be checked the ones that were checked were found to be preserved and/or waxed.
Discouraging that supposedly educated folks are ready to discard physics and common sense and accept the mystical so readily.
30. jfrater - August 26th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Bob: The Church does not allow things considered sacred to be played around with - it is not a conspiracy - it is devotion. The fact remains, these bodies were dug up 50 years after their deaths and found to be incorrupt. It seems more unusual and unscientific to me that you would presume that there is a big conspiracy to trick people in to believing. You might enjoy the top 10 top conspiracies post.
31. Bob S. - August 26th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I don’t believe I mentioned conspiracy at all.
My focus is on the blind obediance to dogma that so many religious people have.
The church has fostered ignorance for centuries.
It’s very simple when you have so many gullible followers. When people get too curious all investigation is stopped in the name of preserving the sanctity of the faith.
Ask questions damn it! Why shoudn’t your belief
stand up against strong investigation.
Ah yes, it may qualify as a sin if you ask the wrong questions.
32. jfrater - August 27th, 2007 at 1:01 am
Bob: it is not sinful to ask questions
The conspiracy that I was claiming you adhere to is the one that organised religions try to intentionally deceive people. I find it hard to believe that every person in a position of power in an organised religion is trying to trick people for their own gain. Surely there must be some who are acting for what they believe to be the good of the people?
33. Crimanon - August 27th, 2007 at 1:20 am
JF: Thats why I fancy myself as a humanist.
Bob: I have faith 1: That gravity will keep me on the ground.
2: That Modern Religion is just a bunch of tripe.
3: That there is something Greater than me.
No matter how much any of these things Prove later on to be false, I still have Faith enough to believe them. Science can’t understand it, I can’t rationalize it. It’s not a sin to ask 1: Why I fall 2: Why they fall or 3: How high you can fall from.
34. jfrater - August 27th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Crimanon: I wouldn’t really consider myself to be a humanist - but it is good that you have an idea of who you are and what you believe - and better that you are so confident in those beliefs!
35. hholguin - August 29th, 2007 at 1:16 am
I agree with you Bob S. -All believers will always try to ignore the purposes of science, even more when its about something that may prove their beliefs are wrong.
Crimanon i don’t really understand why would you believe in something after is proven false, i don’t think is a very good thing to hold on something that is wrong, maybe you cannot rationalize it, but to find the truth you gotta find whats false first.
jfrater is true that religion nowadays is loosing the power it used to have time ago, i can say that many people have change their minds towards religion during the last century, maybe because science has shown us many answers that religion used to barely explain or simply deny…
36. hholguin - August 29th, 2007 at 1:26 am
…Science is based in facts, religion is based in faith. i’m just wondering where i can find the truth!!
37. hholguin - August 29th, 2007 at 1:28 am
Anyway the mummies are cool!!
38. jfrater - August 29th, 2007 at 1:38 am
hhloguin: thanks for your comments. You should note that these aren’t mummies btw, a mummy is a body preserved by embalming and drying, these bodies are not dried or embalmed which puts them in a different category
39. Crimanon - August 29th, 2007 at 2:09 am
hholguin: 1: Gravity is false, means nothing, doesn’t really exist. Something is keeping me on the ground.
2: Modern religion is Fact. Ok, glad I believe in something, Bigger than me.
3: GOD IS DEAD… but if religion is True then ??? can’t be, and I’m still right.
I’m getting a real kick out of this. Do you actually believe me Pious? Do you find my thoughts Christian? Even if God is dead, arn’t there still things in this Universe that are greater than us??? Move into Intellegent Design… We were put here by aliens. XENU the Terrible deposited Our souls here so that we may inhabit this….Crap, I hate them!!!!!! I read Quantum Physics for fun. Give me the Ultimate Equation, and then I’ll tell you Gods home address.
40. Crimanon - August 29th, 2007 at 2:26 am
We can’t handle the truth.
41. jfrater - August 29th, 2007 at 2:49 am
“The truth is out there”…
42. hholguin - September 2nd, 2007 at 1:42 pm
I know that religion “was” the only source that mankind had to socialize and organize communities thousands of years ago, when philosophers were trying to find answers for their questions, and knowledge was very poor. At that time they couldn’t find any answers but “God”, for any question God was the answer. At that time fear of God helped to control man’s primitive instincts and it was completely worthy.
Today we have learn the lesson, now we have answers. Today God is not giving anymore answers, also instead of socialize and organize communities it is destroying and dividing the world, is like hundreds of different religions fighting each other, i guess is not doing any good anymore.
Crimanon: i know God’s home address, but i don’t go visit anymore. I know there is greater things than us in the Universe, but we should worry about us not them, i think they don’t even care about us, maybe we still way too primitive to find the answer. i think the Ultimate Equation could be: ( Man -God + Knowledge = Truth ) I would like to recommend you to read “Thus Spake Zarathustra”by Friedrich Nietzsche, its a great book, great philosopher, it will open your mind a little further.
43. rp - September 4th, 2007 at 10:30 am
Fascinating stuff. It should be noted, though, that this phenomenon isn’t limited to the Catholic religion.
44. melissa - September 5th, 2007 at 10:15 pm
im glad someone has finally talked about incorrupts! im amazed by it, too. im catholic, but i dont base my entire faith on this, though I do believe it to be a miracle, and quite interesting. the only incorrupt i know to be in the USA is Mother Cabrini in NYC. i long to go to europe and dedicate an entire trip to seeing them all. it’s just interesting to me. i’ve been planning a trip also to view 1st class relics in europe. and sample all the food! so much to see with so little money!
45. jfrater - September 6th, 2007 at 1:11 am
melissa: I know what you mean - I had a lovely holiday to Venice earlier this year and the religious artefacts and the food is outstanding. It would be well worth your while making the trip sometime.
46. Angel - September 6th, 2007 at 1:29 pm
Melissa: I too am amazed with incorrupts, also I am Catholic. St. Bernadette was my patron when I was confirmed. I would love to go visit her someday, and have long thought about a trip to see so many amazing places. Someday…
47. Inuyoukai8 - September 22nd, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Well I am a skeptic by nature but I will say this, having been to Croatia, I can say that ST. Silvan moves me. I can’t stand modern organized religion and I don’t mean to offend anyone when I say that. It’s just that too many bad people have taken what should have been good practices and turned them into something useful to them. I can’t accept that God would have wanted it that way. On the other hand I do believe that there are good people out there who are working for the common good. I would love to debunk the incorruptibles and I think I have a pretty hardened heart but seeing St. Silvan…. it’s hard to put into words. That doesn’t mean that I have converted to catholicism. I am not religious, but I can say that I believe that there is a God. Anyone who has spent time in war zones will tell you. You feel God and you hope for a better future. Whether you want to mock me or not, I could care less. I believe it, that’s enough for me.
48. jfrater - September 22nd, 2007 at 11:36 pm
Inuyoukai8: thanks for the comment - it is very nice to hear from someone that has been an eye-witness to one of these incorruptibles.
49. Jason - September 23rd, 2007 at 6:57 pm
This is a cool phenomenon but I don’t believe the theory behind this… God’s truth is based on God’s word (the Bible) and there are no mention that if your body does not decompose that you are considered a saint…
What the bible teaches is that God judges the heart… Saints are people who gave there lives to do God’s will, who were willing to serve others…
50. jfrater - September 24th, 2007 at 12:37 am
Jason: These people are saints for the reason you mention - the incorruptibility is not why they were made saints. Also, don’t forget that the majority of Christians in the world (Catholic and Orthodox) do not believe that the Bible alone is the sole Word of God. Sola Scriptura (the Bible Alone) is a concept from the 1500’s.
51. alex - October 4th, 2007 at 10:34 am
i think the process to preserve the body is called “saponification”. basically the body reacts to the environment and turns the tissues into soap.
anybody would like to have a shower with Ste Bernadette Soubirou??
52. sarah - October 7th, 2007 at 11:23 am
wow…thats…weird and cool at the same time
I thought that little girl…i have no idea what her name is or anything [[which isnt helpful at all lol]]
but she was on ripleys believe it or not she died when she was around 3 and a half and they brought her body to that place where they examine it and she was like one of the first people that they did the embalming thing on…
a looooooong time ago. and sinced then her body still looks real [[like al the other ones on this list]]
well this list is still cool
53. pam - October 29th, 2007 at 7:51 am
i wish to have a vacation in europe someday to see the bodies…i hope they can come out with more list too…
54. Idreno - December 22nd, 2007 at 4:16 pm
I’m sorry if what I say is redundant as I have not taken the time to read through all the comments…
according to friends of mine who have visited Assisi in Italy, the body of St. Francis is incorrupt as well and was never embalmed - he just looks like he is laying there asleep. I have not managed to find much information on the net concerning this. Does anyone know if it is true?
55. Slammerworm - December 26th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Jeeze, none of these guys died happy, did they? They carried their ‘eh’ into eternity.
56. Saint with Jeans - December 27th, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Dear Friends,
I have seen about Saint Bernadette of Lourdes in ‘…Quest’ program at starworld, That led me here. In India there are saints(Hindu) who are in Samadhi. I came to know that, ’samadhi’ is not death, but a state a sleep. At any time these people can walk up from their sleep(?). One samadhi at ’sreerangam’ in Trichy, (Tamilnadu District) has growing hair and nails(?). In Hinduism, about different types of samadhi is written in their Holy books. It is very rare to see in physical world as it is considered as a part of secret science of Hinduism practiced by great saints only. I am also came to know that such saints are living in the caves of himalaya. It will be great helpful to me if any body post the details regarding this topics
57. Slammerworm - January 1st, 2008 at 2:26 am
Saint with Jeans: The biggest problem here is that the saints do not dispel doubts about their abilities by revealing themselves and allowing their abilities to be tested. We’ll all continue to wonder.
58. Tounces the Cat - January 14th, 2008 at 2:23 am
Hmmmm, well yes, I’m a big believer that this is ultimately a natural phenomena. Spooky and slightly creepy, yet fascinating.
Food for thought for nonbelievers, “I bet no one’s yet to witness a high riding criminal to have been discovered incorruptible.”
59. Shakespeare’s Girl - January 17th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
This is really interesting to me, for some morbid reason. How can something hundreds of years old look that good? Fascinating and mind boggling.
60. Mehdi - February 1st, 2008 at 2:38 am
it`s so great but believable if you get GOD everything is possible (From IRAN)
61. thecoops04 - February 2nd, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Sister Bernadette died in 1879, her body had to be exhumed at different times and each the body was in perfect condition! Finally they built this glass cofin and she is on “display” see story and pics at link. Visit this site and read the full story, the wax is a very thin coat as she slightly yellowed after one of the times she was exhumed prob due to pollution so they wanted to protect her. They said a surgeon who last inspected her was amazed that her liver was in perfect condition….your liver dies immediately and deteriorates(sp) If you have seen someone even who has been embalmed they always have a little yellow…like someone with liver failure. This amazes me. I dont even think they embalmed people way back then anyway, havent you ever heard that people many times were buried alive and even strung bells so they could pull the string if they woke up! I apparently had a great great grandmother that had this happen and she woke up during her funeral…lol. CRAZY just thought some of u might enjoy this link, it gives more details and thought it was really neat..this was on the travel channel awhile back
http://www.ourcatholicfaith.or.....rrupt.html
62. Jordan Lund - February 3rd, 2008 at 1:18 pm
I call shenanigans. Unless the corpses are re-dressed every couple of decades the fabric would have rotted away long ago.
63. jfrater - February 3rd, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Jordan: they probably are redressed - the incorruptibility is about their bodies - not their garments
64. Claire - February 8th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Although there are natural occurrences by which bodies do not decompose through the contents of minerals and the qualities of certain soils, the incorruptibles are really amazing because they aren’t subjected to the contents of those soils. They can’t be explained by medical science. I hear they freak people out who see them in person because they can tell they aren’t wax and they aren’t being preserved with chemicals.
65. Esteban - March 1st, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Looking at the casket of Pope John XXIII,the body is almost non observable because of all the bronze vines wending their way across the glass.I wonder if those items are blocking the view for reasons other than for design.
66. rp - March 2nd, 2008 at 12:43 am
This is still one of my favorite lists here. I believe in science, but damn if there are some things in our world that are hard to explain.
67. dette - March 6th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
The wax that has been mentioned was put on recently when the Nuns that took care of St.Bernadette’s body used some kind of liquid to clean her. It caused part of her skin to discolor, so to preserve what she looked to begin with wax/ makeup ( which is commonly used today in funneral hms) was applied. Her clothes also are changed when needed, this means she is completely movible.
68. Spinks - March 11th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
I can’t explain it because I know nothing about decomposition, but I’m fairly certain that ’science’ (that single entity people are always talking about) can come up with a number of explanations, and certainly narrow it down if allowed to scientifically test the bodies. ‘Scientists are at a loss to explain it!’ is always an excuse made by the un-scientific. Scientists would say ‘Give me half a chance and I’ll try’.
Amazing images, anyway. I might have to look more up, because I’m morbid.
69. CScientist - March 31st, 2008 at 5:46 pm
One question for the skeptics is, if you think that the “incorruptibles” are likely due to unexplained rare natural phenomena, then isn’t it interesting that so many of these “rare occurrences” just happen to be saints. Remember these individuals were not declared saints because their bodies were incorrupt, but because of their good lives & deeds!
70. Ray - April 2nd, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I’m really not a good Catholic but I will defend The Church When it’s being grossly misunderstood such as in the case of Science and Religion.She sees that God wrote 2 books,nature and Scripture,and those 2 books can never contradict each other because they both come from the Same author,who is Truth itself.Truth cannot contradict truth.We need Science to ask Questions that we don’t understand,it is like a gift from God that aids us in knowing the world around us.Religion does not contradict Science and before you say Evolution that’s a theory not a discovery.But where the Problem arises is when Peolpe believe Science is infallible when it’s not as it always correcting itself!and to Bob,The Church is millitant when It comes to miracles and The Cannonisation Of Saints,It uses Science to explain what’s going on and to give answers,but when It can’t that’s when we have a Miracle on our hands since Science can’t answer a question about God,who’s outside the Universe!
71. Francesco - April 2nd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Bob The Church just doesn’t say ‘oh Wow we found an Incorrupt body of a holy Person let’s Venerate It’,It has to ask questions,just like you and me.You said they were found to be Preserved and/or waxed as Most Peolple are when they die especially In The Catholic Cultres,where the Body will lie at Wake for up to 3/4 days,but don’t confuse that with that with the removal of all internal Organs so that The body can be ’stuffed’for want of a better word,but even that can only last so long,some of these bodies are hundreds of years Old!
72. Linley - April 10th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Yes these are well preserved bodies and yes it’s amazing but it’s a natural process that has caused this to happen not the work of God. If it was truly the work of God that caused these bodies to be so well preserved why do they show signs of decay (see number 7 especially), why do some of them have wax masks. Surely your God could preserve these bodies abosolutely perfectly. Surely your God could make these bodies, by his magical powers, to look exactly the same as when they were alive. Think about it!!
73. Mad - May 15th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Does anyone know if a picture exists of the two little children who were companions of Sr. Lucia? I read that they died young and were exumed and found to be incruppt.
74. BibleScholar - May 24th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Thanks for for the info. I will wire this to more Christians at http://www.Christian-forum.net
75. Joe_DS - June 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
The related article that appears on this page is well worth a look:
http://www.nhne.com/misc/incorruptibles.html
Turns out that for some of the incorrupt bodies, human intervention was involved. Nonetheless, a facinating topic. Many more references can by found by doing a web search for
Incorruptibles
or
Incorrupt bodies saints
Related Topics:
Grave Wax (WARNING VERY GRAPHIC IMAGES):
http://www.deathonline.net/dec.....ve_wax.htm
Also see: http://adipocere.homestead.com/
The Mummies of Palermo:
http://members.tripod.com/~Motomom/index-3.html
76. SGT P - June 10th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Linely, Hmm you seem somewhat disturbed by this topic. Did you read Francesco’s post.”The Church just doesn’t say ‘oh Wow we found an Incorrupt body of a holy Person let’s Venerate It’,It has to ask questions,just like you and me.You said they were found to be Preserved and/or waxed as Most Peolple are when they die especially In The Catholic Cultres,where the Body will lie at Wake for up to 3/4 days,but don’t confuse that with that with the removal of all internal Organs so that The body can be ’stuffed’for want of a better word,but even that can only last so long,some of these bodies are hundreds of years Old!
I would venture to say that you can’t just dismiss some type of spiritual or mysticle influence out of hand.
GOD BLESS
77. angel my darling - June 17th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
see more pics
78. PSU197 - July 6th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Forgive me if I didn’t see this in someone else’s post, but it is also my understanding that a true incorruptible is also limber…as if they are just sleeping. Has anyone else heard that?
79. rubysp - July 14th, 2008 at 9:10 am
jeez…they look like they might wake up any moment. *shiver
80. fartymccrablice - July 14th, 2008 at 11:40 am
How come the japanese Virgin Mary is japanese?
81. scribe - July 14th, 2008 at 5:40 pm
St Bernadette is “all wax and wishful thinking”, a tribute to Victorian sentimentality. A greater saint than she, Therese of Lisieux (”The Little Flower”) was entirely corrupt after death (she died in 1897); only a few of her bones survive in her reliquiary. The Catholic Church should leave the buried dead where they belong. The spirits of those saints are now in Heaven.
82. diogenes - July 14th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
See, now I can accept that, “scribe”,
but at the same time
the natural mumification of a body, doesn’t help the image of the miraculous …which means my thoughts are having difficulty with any altercations and the underlining reasoning behind later choices made, in order to maintain an agreeable outer surface. The darkened leather skin is what I would expect from a dead body even if it has retained its form and recognition…and I think it vain (still…i’m sorry) in applying makeup or wax.. I don’t think it’s wrong, but it changes and puts truth in an askewed light. Which, again, isn’t wrong entirely,
then again saint Ziti is what I would be fine with, but i understand how it wouldn’t be good PR for every church out there with Incorrupt corpses on show.
Incorrupt means what? by decay? by pure mind and body?
Are the fluids drained?
83. diogenes - July 14th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Saint Zita
84. colin - July 16th, 2008 at 3:38 am
wow that was amazing…really really amazing…
thanks jamie
85. Royce - July 16th, 2008 at 6:41 am
I don’t believe until there is conclusive scientific evidence. i’m sorry but i simply do not believe it is possible to stop the process of nature.
86. Peter - July 19th, 2008 at 5:58 am
Thanks, very interesting.
One critical note though: this list gives the impression that only the bodies of Catholic saints are or can be incorrubtile. This is not so. Why not include saints that were not necessarily Catholic or even Christian ?
87. Peter - July 19th, 2008 at 6:02 am
@Royce nr86.
Well, the conclusive scientific eveidence is available in abundance. Are you afraid that your view of life is unsustainable if you accept that these things exist and happen ?
By the way, I wouldn’t call this ’stopping the process of nature’. Nature is what is, and as such it never stops. Why not be open to the idea that we simply haven’t begun to understand nature and the relationship between concsiousness and matter ?
All the best.
88. Peter - July 19th, 2008 at 6:08 am
FYI
(Beautiful pictures of his body exist)
On March 7, 1952, Paramahansa Yogananda entered mahasamadhi, a God-illumined master’s conscious exit from the body at the time of physical death. His passing was marked by an extraordinary phenomenon. A notarized statement signed by the Director of Forest Lawn Memorial-Park testified: “No physical disintegration was visible in his body even twenty days after death….This state of perfect preservation of a body is, so far as we know from mortuary annals, an unparalleled one….Yogananda’s body was apparently in a phenomenal state of immutability.”
89. Peter - July 19th, 2008 at 6:11 am
53 Pam
The place to go then is Italy. There are bodies of saints in many churches. Recommended: Bologna, Assisi, Lucca.
90. Bo - July 26th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
This is spectacular! My 14 yr old asked “why?” It’s definately a sign from God my love! How can people refuse to believe when such obvious evidence exists?!
91. GAZ - July 29th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Hey! i have been to see st bernadette over 4 times and it’s awsome! when she was first exhumed 30 years after burial, her clothes were DAMP and her rosary had RUSTED AND TURNED GREEN! This proves that the body was not burried in any special conditions. I have also seen Catherine Laboure and saint Vincent de Paul….I’d recommend it to anyone…it’s amazing!
92. Jake - July 31st, 2008 at 3:17 pm
Incorruptable means that a person is exatly in the same physical state as when he/she dies; no loss of skin tissue or elasticity for that matter “WITHOUT EMBALMING” Most of these have been embalmed and yet signs of wear are showing on them. These are clearly HUMAN INTERVENTIONS!
93. Orchid - August 4th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
In regards to the earlier comment: “…isn’t it interesting that so many of these “rare occurrences” just happen to be saints”, it’s not common practice to go around digging up the general populous to see if they’re decaying or not. If it were, perhaps we would find this phenomenon in other, regular people as well?
94. Kai - August 12th, 2008 at 7:00 am
I would like to add another incorrupt corpse to the list: St. Olaf of Norway. King of Norway from 1015 to 1028, killed in battle, and enshrined in Nidaros Cathedral. He was canonized in 1164 by Pope Alexander III and is now the patron saint of Norway. His shrine was a major pilgrimage site for Scandinavian countries until the reformation, when the shrine was removed and taken to Copenhagen to be melted down into coins. Olaf’s body was buried in an unmarked grave on the grounds to try to dissuade the worship of saints in Norway.
95. Egg - August 12th, 2008 at 8:48 am
It always seems funny to me that the Catholics would exhume bodies to see if a person has rotted (though I know not all the listed Saints were proven as incorruptible this way). I believe that the Roman Inquisition was during the 1500’s and thus was a hayday of supernatural hysteria. Wouldn’t a preserved corpse mean something negative, such as a ghoul or witch? It’s not like the clergy were above being called out to the pyres.
All in all, this thing is right up my ally. I’m a wannabe hagiophile
96. kay kay bitches - August 15th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
this iight but freaky but kool- i learned bout dis in history 2 days ago-im in da 7th grade
97. Em - August 19th, 2008 at 5:03 am
For those who belive in God, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explanation will suffice!
98. Em - August 19th, 2008 at 5:06 am
I also have seen St bernadettes body, AMAZING. Also I have been to Lourdes, a truly humbling and woundrous place.
99. lonnie - September 14th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Its faith at work
100. dona-jo - September 14th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
it’s wonderful..truly, faith moves in mysterious ways
101. Matt Howard - September 14th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Yep, Stalin and Lenin must be saints as well. They didn’t rot either. Oh yeah, and all those extremely well-preserved Egyptian mummies. I’m sorry, I can’t see how any of this has to do with supernatural power, but it is still wonderfully cool to see bodies that are hundreds of years old so ‘fresh’.
102. Peter - September 15th, 2008 at 12:38 am
@Matt
See comment 87.
It is actually pretty easy to establish the difference between a body, any body, that’s been embalmed or preserved, and the incorrupt body of a saint. Easy, that is, if one is sensitive to the quality of energy of places, things, people.
If you are open to the idea that there is a world of experience and knowledge as yet unknown to you, you have a good chance of discovering it. If not, no chance.
Do yo know that many people travel long distances to meditate in certain places because of the energy ? (Like the tomb of St Francis in Italy) The average atheist will think: ‘Yeah, losers, spacecases and fanatical believers.’ In fact, intelligent, succesful, openminded people. The only difference between them and those atheists is that sensitivity. (OK, chances are they are healthier and happier as well).
All the best.
Peter
103. Matt Howard - September 15th, 2008 at 4:59 am
Hi Peter,
I am more than open to experience and knowledge yet unknown to me, in fact, I believe that constant learning is the key to a fulfilling life. However, just because I do not know the mysteries of our world and the universe doesn’t mean I need to make the unnecessary leap that something ’supernatural’ is out there. True, these bodies (barring a few that have admittedly been preserved) are in remarkable condition. Proof of an afterlife, proof of ‘God’, proof of saints? No. It is proof of nothing other than the fact that we have not yet discovered the real reason these bodies are preserved so well.
I happen to be an atheist, a very happy one at that. I just really object to labeling phenomena that we do not understand yet as proof of anything supernatural. I think that doing so really limits the scope of human curiosity and progress. I understand your point though, and I agree that certain atheists can be extremely judgmental and arrogant (usually ones that are atheists for the wrong reasons). I just think that labeling the unknown and mysterious as ’supernatural’ does more harm than good. Cheers for your response.
All the best.
Matt
104. Peter - September 15th, 2008 at 6:00 am
Matt,
As you can see in comment 87, I agree with you about the label ’supernatural’. And of course a preserved body is no proof of God or an afterlife, let alone of my particulair interpretation of the bible being the only correct one.
There is a problem though in what you write. It’s in the word ‘we’. If you mean ‘we the people that believe everything can be reduced to matter, however tiny pieces of it, because matter equals reality’ than by definition no proof of anything beyond 3 dimensions could ever be found.
If we rephrase the question ‘does God exist’ as follows: is consciousness a product of matter or is matter a manifestition of (energy, which is a manifestation of) consciousness ? than scientific research is very strongly indicating that the latter is the case.
And so the relationship ’sinful human being - grey haired man in the sky’ becomes ‘individual consciousness with limited awareness of self - infinite consciousness’.
This relationship is something that can be experienced and even ‘known’, but not with the mind that can only function in time and 3 dimensions.
Reading both ancient and modern spiritual texts in this light, suddenly vaque and obscure passages and notions, and indeed strange phenomena like preserved bodies, take on new meaning.
This, discovering one’s individual relationship with the whole, is what religion is. The rest, original sin and hell, organisations etc., is invented by human need and fear.
I hope this doesn’t make religion sound like a hobby. It is a journey we all make and the only thing that really matters. In your words: continuous learning.
105. Matt Howard - September 15th, 2008 at 6:26 am
Hi Peter,
I’m still a bit confused by your argument. I’m not really sure what you mean by matter being a manifestation of energy THEREFORE consciousness? I think it’s a big leap to deduce that due to consciousness being a manifestation of energy, then an infinite consciousness must exist, and to be honest I’m a bit perplexed by that argument.
I also don’t agree that evaluating your relationship to the ‘whole’ indicates religion. I contemplate my relationship to the universe daily. Why am I here? What is my purpose? So on and so forth. However, just because I am conscious and am able to ask these metaphysical questions does not mean that a super-consciousness lie dormant throughout the universe waiting to be discovered. It simply means I have evolved to the point of cognition, sentience and self-awareness and am able to rationalize my relationship to the universe.
If you could explain your first argument a bit more clearly I’d appreciate it, as I actually find it pretty fascinating, I’m just a bit confused as to what you really mean?
Cheers
Matt
106. Peter - September 15th, 2008 at 8:55 am
Hi Matt,
Sorry I wasn’t more clear. It’s not easy to condense these rather vast notions into a few paragraphs.
Nice that you’re interested. Sometimes I wonder why am I writing this. It feels more meaningful knowing someone in the universe is actually thinking about what I write. I appreciate that.
I didn’t mean that consciousness is a manifestation of energy, but the other way round. We know that matter is only a condensed form of energy. What happens on the material plane has its blueprint on the energylevel. First a person’s energy/lifeforce/resistance weakens, and later he bcomes physically ill. A piece of art first exists as an idea, than energy (work) transforms it into a material thing.
The question remains: does matter (braincells), however subtle or condensed, produce consciousness ? Or is consciousness the sine qua non, the source, the causal factor in life / the universe ? Energy can be seen as the bridge between the two. This has its parallel in the subtle body, where the chakras (whose actual existence has been proven with modern equipment) function as the bridge between the psychological (consciousness) and the physical (matter).
So what I am saying is that science clearly leans toward the nodion that consciousness (or ’something immaterial’) is producing material effects and not vice versa.
A few examples of indications: DNA can be changed by emotions and strong intentions. A randomised computerprogram can be directed with the mind. Telepathy as a phenomenon is gemerally accepted, in Holland even by the unofficial ’skeptics union’.
What does this have to do with religion ? OK. Knowing that the whole thing, the universe and everything in it, is connected. And knowing that time exist only when the mind is operating, the question is: can I be aware of a connection between ‘my’ consciousness and the consciousnes of the whole ?
I put that question opposite the old question ‘Is there a man in the sky ?’ Obviously, if God is something outside of me, there can be no connection.
Religion comes from re-ligare, to re-connect. So religion is not about believing this or that or folowing a set of rules. It is about this relationship.
You say you contemplate your relationship with the universe. That is great and more that can be said of most people. You’ll agree with me though that knowing you love your wife is very different from actually feeling the love for her flow through you. What I mean is: the mind can have ideas about oneself and the universe and life, but it cannot really know anything. Not like you know that certain music is good for you, or that the presence of certain people uplifts you, or that your sister will not be hapy with her new boyfriend.
As a child I thought the saints I heard about in church had been very good people, kind, giving to the poor and not hurting their siblings etc. Now I understand that they were (and are) people that live in the awareness of their connection with the whole, or rather with the course of the whole. That which people call God.
Before I write a book, let me quote Thomas of Aquino. When he was already a famous scholar and writer, he had some spiritual experiences. His publisher asked him to hurry up with the book he was supposedly writing, and Thomas told him: all I have written before has in my eyes no more value than straw.
I’m actualy not sure this was clearer than last time (:
107. Matt Howard - September 15th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Hi Peter
Thanks for clearing up your argument, however I still disagree. I lean strongly towards the ‘matter creates consciousness’ side of the argument. I also don’t agree about your definition of ‘energy’. What type of energy do you mean? Kinetic? electro-magnetic? Strong/weak nuclear? True, energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transformed. But that is vastly different to the view that energy is an all binding ‘life force’ that influences chakra/ telepathy and illness! Also, a few of the examples that you quote I am strongly skeptical of e.g. DNA being changed by thought alone, Telepathy being real, etc.
Thanks for clearing your argument up, I still don’t agree, but it certainly is a fascinating world-view, so thanks for sharing:)
Regards,
Matt
108. Peter - September 16th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Hi Matt,
OK, so I was clearer, thanks.
I don’t understand how come you bring in ‘agreeing’. The scientific evidence of telepathy is overwhelming. Also the power of prayer, or rather focussed attention plus intention, has been demonstrated over and over again in large scale tests. The subtle body in and around the prysical body can be measured. The effectiveness of acupuncture, based on this, is not in dispute anymore (safe among diehard, usually elderly traditional doctors. Too old to change their mind) Water has been shown to have some sort of memory. Plants have been shown to have an emotional life. Who was that guy that was able to open his garagadoor from hundreds of miles away by thinking of a plant in his house ? (connected to a measuring device, connected to the door)
This is not a worldview, this is the reality you ad I live in. Now, experiencing the quality of energy of people, plants etc., being able to influence a randomised program, this is not the same as contact with the divine of course. But it helps to be open to that.
The thing is: once one has had sex, all theories about it become sort of obsolete. Once on ehas been in deep meditation, thought becomes a very relative thing. Once one knows love, what can one say to those that ‘don’t believe in it’ ?
I’ll never forget the first time I felt the energy of a flower. I realised that until then I had never experienced the inside of living cratures.
Likewise, a taste of the divine, whatever it is and whatever ideas one can have about it, leaves one changed forever.
So be warned, there is no turning back.
If you want to read: Einstein of course, Shelldrake, Zukav. CNN report on acupuncture. University of Vienna (mid 90’s) on chakras. I remember reports of research on prayer in journals of Self Realisation Fellowship, of Ananda, of Ecolonie in France. The TH organisation has bookcases full of studies on the effect of meditation on the environment.
Excellent combination of spirituality and common sense: The Path by Donald Wwalters. Check out heartmath.org, many studies. I believe the DNA study was done by them also. Bringing back to mind the research into memory, showing it is not in the brain.
Etc etc etc etc.
As some scientist recently said: the materialist notion of life will prove to be a footnote in history; something that a part of the world believed in for a while.
Disclaimer: I don’t believe in UFO abduction, nor in global conspiracies.
109. Peter - September 16th, 2008 at 11:24 am
PS Check out the list about twins also. There’s been quite a bit of research done on twins, showing clearly that there exists between some of them a telepathic, or in any case non material, connection.
110. Matt Howard - September 16th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Peter,
The vast majority of mainstream scientists totally reject Telepathy. Yes, some parapsychologists claim that tests produce significant data, however, parapsychology is yet another pseudoscience, along with racial theory, phrenology, intelligent design and so on. There is no ‘abundance’ of evidence for telepathy, nor has it been confirmed in any peer-reviewed scientific journals. Just because you might have read some research by a fringe scientist does not mean that it has been accepted or verified by mainstream science. It is a falsehood, and if you do some proper research into parapsychology you will see that the experiments are highly questionable, produce no significant statistical data and are totally rejected by proper scientists.
The power of prayer has been experimented on in large scale tests, with absolutely no indication that it has any effect upon the prayer subjects. I don’t know what the hell you mean by saying ‘water has memory’ and plants have an ‘emotional life’. That is nonsense and it is kind of embarrassing to read it.
I think you have a very skewed view of what energy actually is. It isn’t a life force, all-binding chakra, or any of those vague, highly questionable opinions.
It is kind of acceptable that you list your sources, but they are not academic sources in the true sense. Refer me to a proper scientific journal. One which is peer reviewed, critically analyzed and sanctioned by a university or legitimate think-tank. Of course, Einstein and the University of Vienna are academic, but it still isn’t enough. One or two examples that you have read does not make a subject true, nor scientific.
My main argument is this. Just because one or two scientists/pseudo-scientific journals/parapsychologists/authors or whatever say that something along the lines of Telepathy, ESP, Telekinesis exists does NOT make it scientifically acceptable! It has to be verified by mainstream science, it has to have experiments that can be replicated and performed without bias and in a controlled environment (something parapsychology completely lacks), then the statistics have to be compiled and the results published. Sorry to sound aggressive, but when I read something like you just wrote about water having a memory and plants having emotions, it does not make any sense whatsoever.
Matt
111. Peter - September 17th, 2008 at 12:29 am
Hi Matt,
Your classifying the things I wrote about under ‘parapsychology’ shows you are totally out of touch with them and with cutting edge science. I think untill you actually read and experience what I’m writing about, you’ll be a believer.
I mean, are you seriously saying that, for instance, acupuncture is nonsense ?
Like a well known Dutch professor remarked recently: just like most human beings, also scientist simply ignore data that don’t suit them.
I do appreciate your desire to accept only what’s been tested. Well, I’d say, test it.
112. Matt Howard - September 17th, 2008 at 12:57 am
Peter,
Unfortunately, Telepathy comes under the blanket of parapsychology. I never disputed acupuncture, as I do not know enough about it to make a comment. I have however, studied many areas of parapsychology and understand the arguments that relegate them fields to the level of pseudo-science. I didn’t classify your water/memory and plant life having emotions under any scientific heading because they are so ridiculous they cannot even be compared with anything approaching science.
Cutting edge science comprises experiments such as the large hadron collider, sending space probes to the edge of our solar system and astro-physicists that try to explain things such as super-massive black holes and the possible existence of ‘dark matter’. Cutting edge science does not cover the pseudo-scientific realms of telepathy, chakra, life force or any other mumbo-jumbo. I am not out of touch with ‘cutting edge science’. I would rather argue that you are out of touch with what true, testable, observable science actually is. It’s certainly not the ‘theory’ (i.e. complete nonsense) of water having memory hahaha.
Matt
113. Matt Howard - September 17th, 2008 at 1:15 am
Oh yeah, and that guy you wrote about who moved the garage door with his mind? That is an example of Telekinesis, which, along with Telepathy, forms the one of the major branches of parapsychology. Do some research and you will see that the majority of what you are talking about is parapsychology, whether you recognize it or not.
114. Peter - September 17th, 2008 at 3:23 am
Matt,
Too bad you cannot even comtemplate the notion you may be way behind times. Laughing doesn’t make your arguments any more convincing. You admit you don’t know much or anything about acupuncture yet you seem to feel comfortable labelling chakras mumbo jumbo. ?????????????
Study the work of Nobel prize winner Bose, study Shelldrake (heard of him ?), study Tolle, study and then study some more and then let’s talk some more.
BTW No, the experiment with the plant was not telekinesis but telepathy.
I’m sorry Matt, I’m sure you are a nice guy, but the way you dimiss things you clearly don’t know anything about makes you a believer in my opnion.
All the best.
115. Matt Howard - September 17th, 2008 at 3:40 am
Peter,
Seeing as I haven’t studied enough, care to explain how exactly water has memory? Or how a plant has emotions? I seem to be so ignorant that I really need you to explain these things to me.
See the difference between my answers and your is I give reasons for my disagreements. I fully explained why I reject parapsychological (telekinesis, ESP, etc) fields based on their inability to conduct repeatable, stable, unbiased and fully controlled tests in environments suited to scientific standards, AND STILL produce results. This is my complete argument.
In none of your last 3 posts have you offered me any explanations of the things that you are claiming are ’scientific’. Note the first pre-requisite of believing in something. The burden of proof is on YOU. Please, explain these things to me. I’m not asking for an essay, just a few paragraphs to outline your notion that water has memory. Then a couple more sentences to explain your stance on plants having memory. Then, PLEASE, explain to me how (the mechanics, not the philosophy) a man can open a garage door through a plant, which is being controlled through his mind.
You accuse me of dismissing things. You have dismissed my arguments by not even bothering to acknowledge them. So, one more time, please explain your water/memory and plant/emotion theory.
116. Matt Howard - September 17th, 2008 at 3:49 am
Oh, and as for studying certain peoples opinions, have a go at studying Paul Thagard. His argument’s center around the reasons why parapsychology is a psuedo-science. Have a look at James Randi for fun, even though he is only a magician and not an academic. Try on Paul Kurtz and Churchland. They have extremely strong arguments regarding how parapsychology is a pseudo-science.
117. Higgs - September 17th, 2008 at 7:30 am
# 5 looks like a Michelangelo painting.
118. Peter - September 17th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Matt,
This is the point. You still think in terms of objects being seperate, and objective tests being possible. While the central issue of the very cutting edge physics that you mentioned (you seem to forget that that is only one field in which the edge can be cutting) is that there is no such thing as seperation. The decision to test this or that already influences the outcome.
Which, BTW, is not the main reason why those silly tests with zenith cards didn’t used to yield much. The researchers had no clue about the connection between brainwaves and the occurence of telepathy and ESP.
I thought it was commonly known that tests showed that plants tend to grow away for rockmusic and toward classical music. Apparently not. The oscillograph of Bose showes plants reactions to various stimuli. The way the guy in an airplane was able to open the garagedoor using the plant’s reaction to his thinking of it, was by letting the meter that moved when registrering the plant’s reaction close a circuit.
I don’t see why the burden of proof in on me Matt. You know, 40 years ago books about auras were considered dangerous and evil. 30 years ago people that read them were weird. 20 years ago it was hard to get 3 people in a yogaclass to feel energy with their hands. 10 years ago a major shift became noticable. Now I give yogaworkshops at popfestivals, and pretty much ALL particpants can feel energy. Meditation and yoga are taught at universities, used in hospitals and recommended (+ practised) by doctors all over the place.
You must be thinking the world is going mad.
The burden of explaining that all these people are deluded weirdos that are experiencing things that don’t exist, that it is not true that businessman that meditate are more succesful, that galvanic skin resitence is not an indicator of quality of health, etc etc etc etc (read books for the etceteras) is on you.
O yes, about water. Or rather, in general about the limitations of a purely chemical approach to matter. There is water and there is water. Both are h2o, same temperature etc. Why is water 1 so mcuh healther than water 2 ? Because 1 has been running through a lemniscat shaped (not sure of the word in English) pipe and 2 ‘remembers’ a straigh pipe.
There is air 1 and air 2. Chemically the same. As NASA dicovered, there can yet be a major difference between the two. The difference is in the energy.
Last thing. I guess you don’t believe that there are presently hundreds of people, perhaps thousands by now, that live without eating ? Once you know a person like that, all theories about why that is not possible are suddenly meaningless, believe me.
As I hope you are beginning to understand, this is very far removed from your parapsychology.
Let me leave you with a simple question: when you think of your right hand for a minute, what is it that makes it feel warmer, bigger, more alive (these are the usual reactions) than the left hand ? What is the tingling that you feel ?
119. Peter - September 17th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
PS Next week I have an interview with an artist who creates pictures by influencing a randomised computer program with his mind. I guess according to you this is not possible ?
read http://www.iebele.nl/pdf/2008_.....web_UK.pdf
and think again.
120. Matt Howard - September 17th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Peter,
Sorry, I don’t want to debate with you anymore. Of course the burden of proof is on you, YOU are the one who is claiming that these things are true, even though mainstream science doesn’t accept them. Therefore, it is up to YOU to back-up your claims and prove them. If you can’t understand that, then there is no point talking.
I don’t think the world is going mad. I think the world is getting more business-savvy. Yoga, Homeopathy, Magnetic healing, they are all run by very clever people who exploit the vulnerable by telling them that this ‘cutting edge, new age science’ will help solve all their problems! That is why all this new age pseudoscience is on the rise.
People living without eating? Another stupid claim backed-up by absolutely no evidence. As for the person who can move a computer program with his mind? I totally accept! I have seen that done and performed by quadriplegics in a controlled environment. However it is not due to some weird telepathy. The computer program is simply calibrated to interpret certain brain-waves with mouse movements. Pretty amazing stuff but nothing to do with telepathy.
As for Yoga and meditation being taught. I absolutely agree with that! But not for the reasons you do. I do not think it has anything to do with a weird, vague ‘energy field’. It is used to relieve stress and tension through purely physical means. Just because someone feels better because they believe that yoga is helping them DOES NOT MEAN that this is due to some strange energy. It is like a placebo.
Oh, and as for the water memory. I did some research and the results didn’t surprise me except for one. An Irish scientist did somehow manage to duplicate the effects of homeopathy. Now before you foam at the mouth, no other scientist since has been able to reproduce her results, and she herself has no idea how it happened. Most likely an anomaly or something wrong with the methodology. Perhaps the best evidence that homeopathy is bullshit is the fact that in every single large scale test performed, absolutely no evidence has been found that homeopathic remedies work more than placebos.
This will be my final post on this matter. I can’t argue with someone about the intricacies of scientific pursuits when they keep making outlandish claims about people living without eating (unless of course they are hooked up to a drip with all vital nutrients being injected into them).
Good talking, but you need to come to grips with what proper science is all about, and stop throwing around vague terms like ‘energy’. What TYPE of energy?!
Matt
121. Peter - September 18th, 2008 at 5:30 am
Matt,
That’s OK. We don’t agree about on who the burden of proof is.
However, if you are not even willing to check out the pooof I supply, you give the impression of not being open to any other reality than the one in your own mind.
The link I gave leads to the rational explantion of the experiments conducted by an artist in collaboration with the university of Amsterdam. No, it’s not quadruplegics whose brains are hooked up, it’s pure and simple mind over matter. With pictures and all.
The placobo effect ? That’s the word that always appears when defencents of the materialistic worldview have run out of arguments. They don’t have any explanation for this placebo effect; it’s just a word. Like luck or fate.
Measured variations in GSR, also placebo I guess ?
(How does the placebo effect work with animals ?)
There are researched and documented cases of people living without eating. You’re not going to read them, but for those who are open to the possibility: google for instance Therese Neumann, sungazing, living on light, ‘Autobiography of a yogi’.
The times they are achanging Matt, and you’re not noticing.
That’s OK, no hard feelings. I wish you all the best.
122. Matt Howard - September 18th, 2008 at 5:54 am
Hi Peter,
Yeah it was good chatting. I realize now that you have a certain set of beliefs that you obviously are not going to stop believing in. That’s cool, I just get irked when people try to pass these beliefs off as science.
Your article didn’t give me any evidence. The author threw around claims that didn’t have any sources or even footnotes, so I can have no opinion of the article. Again, come back to me when the ‘mind over matter’ artwork has been peer-reviewed and appears in a scientific journal and I’ll be more than happy to debate it with you. A two page blurb by a fan of the artist is not proof of anything. I also have a massive problem with people quoting Einstein, of all people, TOTALLY out of context. Read the opening chapters of Richard Dawkins ‘The God Delusion’, and you will understand exactly what Einstein means when he uses the terms religion, spiritualism, mystery and awe. Also, the article doesn’t explain anything whatsoever. He doesn’t even give a brief overview of how his computer program works! I think a more rational explanation for his art is that he is creating them through totally normal methods then telling people that he creates them with his mind. He isn’t even an academic! An artist who is lying in order to sell his product and promote himself is a much more believable scenario than a visionary artist who can control things with his mind, even though that flies in the face of every conceivable facet of modern science. A self promoting artist lying, or possessing an ability that would, in essence, re-write all laws of the universe? I know which one I’m choosing.
I’ll end with this. I can respect your beliefs. If I abused you for believing in Yogi’s, life force, spiritual energy, telepathy and telekinesis I would be abusing about 3/4 of the worlds population as well. But do not try and pass your beliefs off as science. Yes, some of the stuff you quote and read sounds scientific, but just because it uses vague terms and long words doesn’t make it so.
Oh, and as for the times they are achanging? Not really. People believed in all this stuff thousands of years ago. It wasn’t proven then, and it isn’t proven now, no matter how much pseudo-scientific rhetoric you throw at me.
Regards,
Matt
123. Peter - September 18th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Hey Matt,
I thought you weren’t going to write anymore ?
I never quoted Einstein, but I will now: intuition is the main thing.
The problem, your problem, here is: the 3D mind can by definition never grasp what intuition is.
Correct, already thousands of years ago people had a grasp of the subtle body. The times are changing in the sense that now ‘outer’ science, having developed sensitive enough instruments, meets and generally confirms the ‘inner’ science.
Let me get this straight:
- the fact that yoga and meditation were laughed at 25 yearts ago and are now taught at universities and recommended by doctors, cannot have anything to do with their intrinsic value, it must be because people want to make money, right ?
- An artist, conducting experiments under supervision of the Amsterdam university, must be lying if the results run against your ideas about the world, right ?
- the beneficial effects of subtle treatments and therapies cannot be the effect of their inherent value, but must be the result of some unexplained (but no doubt explainable within a 3D frame someday in the future) proces called placebo, right ?
- you consider me to be a simpleminded believer in mumbo jumbo who has no idea of what real science is, right ?
- You think that because I practise meditation I can have no idea of string theory or chaos theory or tipping point, right ?
Sure Matt.
Hey man, what have you got to lose by opening up to things you used to think are impossible ?
You might ask: what have you got to lose by considering the idea that all these things I write about are illusions ?
The difference here is: I have and I did believe that. But I studied and investigated and experienced, and that has given me a, imho, deeper and expanded view. It doesn’t make me a better person than you, but it does mean that I know from both knowledge and experience what I’m talking about.
OK, this was my last post on this. Let’s meet again in a year and see where we are.
124. Matt Howard - September 18th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Sorry, one more post:P
Peter,
You think that I have an agenda, that I really don’t want to believe in telepathy, telekinesis, mind over matter and all that stuff. Holy crap, I would love it if that was real! Seriously, it would make my day if I picked up the paper, and there was an article on Harvard University confirming that telepathy was true by using testable, repeatable methods. Just think of all the opportunities that knowing that this stuff actually existed would open!
Unfortunately, this hasn’t happened yet. As I said before, when one of the things that you believe in has been throughly investigated and shown to produce repeatable results in a test environment by a number of unbiased and impartial scientists I will give it my full attention.
What I am not going to do, is accept things that are currently rejected by mainstream science because some guy on the internet points me to a few dubious articles (written not by an impartial observer, but the artist himself!!!!), and provides me with a few anecdotes that have no sources or basis in hard fact.
One more time. When experiments are set up, that can be;
1. Repeated with results, not just one test that produces a strange result and then never happens again
2. Conducted not by the practitioners of these strange fields, but by impartial scientists
3. Consitantly produces data that can be verified and tested again and again
4. Monitored by numerous leading institutions for validity
then I will give it my full attention and ‘open up my mind’ (even though it is already open to logical discourse).
I will leave you will one quote, then I promise not to write any more lol.
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” - Carl Sagan.
So far, these fields you talk about have provided no extraordinary evidence whatsoever, which is why they are rejected by science.
See you in a year, hopefully you can point me to some great sources that prove the existence of telekinesis, telepathy etc.
Matt
125. Matt Howard - September 18th, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Ok, I’m breaking my promise haha
I just couldn’t help counter-arguing some of your points.
1. In regards to Yoga and Meditation. As I said before, I think that these things can be greatly beneficial and I applaud hospitals for using them. However, they are not supernatural! Yoga relaxes your body through purely physical means. It stretches muscles, de-stresses you and improves blood flow. Of course this is an oversimplification, but it doesn’t mean that some cosmic energy field is influencing you! Same with meditation. Purely mental. Just because concentrating and clearing your mind makes you feel better does not mean it is supernatural. Is hypnosis supernatural? No. Highly entertaining and even beneficial in some cases, but not supernatural.
2. Yes, I still maintain that the artist is lying. You would have a point in attacking me for denying or not acknowledging proof of mind over matter, but you haven’t provided me ANY proof! The article you sent me, was, in fact, totally and utterly useless. For pete’s sake, it was WRITTEN BY THE ARTIST!! Of course he isn’t going to be objective!!! And as for it being sanctioned by the University of Amsterdam, I’m guessing that this university has different faculties, am I correct? Is it being sanctioned by the science department, philosophy department, fine art department? Again, provide a little tangible proof and I’ll believe it.
3. Going back to homeopathy. The placebo effect is based on the power of suggestion. If you were to say, conduct an experiment that tested the strength of a particularly strong aspirin, the conductors of the test would be able to measure the effects of the drug, through both scientific testing and how the patient feels. Homeopathy has never been able to do that. It is twaddle.
4. No, I don’t consider you to be simpleminded. You have beliefs that I don’t share, but that doesn’t make you stupid. However, when you send me, or refer me, to articles like the ‘mind over matter’ one, you demonstrate a total lack of understanding of what a verifiable, peer-reviewed, credible source actually is. When you quote people like Sheldrake, who’s theories have been met with hostility by the vast majority of scientists, or tell me that people can live only on sunlight, when tests have shown without a shadow of a doubt that this is totally impossible, you leave the impression that you take everything you read at total face value. One of the leading advocates of ‘living on sunlight’ actually lives in my state in Australia. She underwent an experiment. She went for ten days without food or water. At the end of the ten days, she was completely dehydrated, her pupils were dilated, she was talking incoherently, her heart rate was twice that it should be and her kidneys were starting to fail. The test was stopped for fear she might die. And this is one of the leading advocate of living on sunlight! She has since refused any other tests, and she has admitted that she has food in her house, claiming it is only ‘for her husband’. Her name is Jasmuheen (Ellen Greve).
4. I’ve already explained why I accept meditation, and I see no conflict between you doing that and knowing about string theory etc. However, just because you understand one thing, does not mean that your beliefs in another subject are logical or infallibly.
Perhaps the strongest argument as to why I don’t believe these things is the most simple one. Go on television, go out in public, go to an Ivy League university, and prove it. One thing about people who practice all this stuff is that they know how to sell their craft. Yoga, meditation, homeopathy, psychic reading, they are all multi-million dollar industries. Why then, has no psychic simply won the lottery? Why then, has none of them gone onto make millions of dollars by showcasing their craft publically? Why is it that every known psychic who has appeared in public been proven to by lying? (Uri Gellar for example). Why has no-one who practices telekinesis simply gone on television and moved a chair with their mind? Why has no one claimed James Randi’s million dollars?
BECAUSE THEY CAN’T. These things would be soooooo easy to prove. Just as gravity can be proven by dropping an object towards the ground, why can’t a telekinetic just go into the middle of Times Square and throw a basketball at the coca-cola sign with his mind?
What have I got to lose by opening my mind and accepting these things? My money for one!! I have never seen an advertisement or promotion ANYWHERE for psychics, telepathics, telekinetics, homeopathy etc that are offering their services for free.
You seem to have read a lot on all this stuff. Good for you. Just because I read a lot on leprechauns or ghosts doesn’t make them real. I find proper science more fascinating and stranger that moving things with your mind.
Matt
126. Peter - September 19th, 2008 at 2:34 am
Matt,
I guess we are alike in that we can’t help ourselves. (:
And not even thinking ‘that asshole should admit that…’ but more like ‘the poor guy doesn’t realize…’
OK, here goes:
1 I have several times stated there is no such thing as supernatural. Yet you keep accuming me of making claims about supernatural processes. Why ?
2 You are telling me that yoga is flexing your muscles etc. Well, I have practised it for over 20 years, so allow me to assess that you have no clue whatsoever about yoga.
3 I have the exact same understanding as you have about double blind, repeatable tests.
4 you have failed to understand what I wrote about the illusion of ‘objective’ science. Quantumphysics was the end of that idea.
5 You fail to understand the connection between brainwaves and the occurence of telepathy.
6 Check out the list about twins and tell me how a test like the one that describes the one reacting to the other’s experiences could possibly be repeated? It’s not possible. The next day, or second, the person is already changed.
7 This is why these demands that non 3D phenomena be proved within a 3D test situation, are silly.
8 I don’t go to psychics and I suggest you don’t. The fact that you keep throwing in the things I write about with Uri Geller type of stuff, shows you are totally out of touch.
9 This is not to say I have never heard people say things they must have picked up through some kind of mental or telepathic connection. Many times, and often by sincere, intelligent and fun people. I don’t go for that kind of information however, because it rarely comes from high levels and usually is tainted by the person supplying it.
10 Shelldrake may have opponents (showing the same kind of emotional stress as fanatical religious people), but the point here is that he DOES back up his theories with tests that are up to scientific scrutiny. That’s why some materialists are so uncomfortable with him and his work.
11 The placebo effect. Please explain to me how it works. It was shown, for instance, that people that trust their physician recover from churgery faster than those that do not.
Please explain where in the body this trust is, what is its chemical formula, and how exactly does this stuff affect the healing process ?
12 I’m sure there are liers and deceivers that make claims about supernatural powers and what not.
However, to state that all of the millions of people that have reported experiences in which some kind of non material process was involved must have been either liers, deceivers of very naive, isn’t that a bit much ?
The artist wrote about his art in I think a reasonable way. He sounded like a nice and sincere guy on the phone. I have a friend who is a well kown and respected Dutch journalist who knows this artist. O yeah, he’s a nice guy, he said about him.
Of course, a person that seems a nice guy could still be a liar. But usually people that seem nice seem nice because they are in fact nice.
13 You seem to be op the opinion that unless a person comes to Harvard to let himself be tested in a lab by scientists that are convinced 3D thinkers and show in double blind repeated tests that they can perform miracles, the things I write about must be considered to be of the order of leprechouns.
Well, it’s not going to happen. In the meantime, energy is for many people like you and me a totally integrated aspect of everyday life.
14 I’ll give you one example. I could give hundreds, and millions of people could give hundreds. Adding up to hunderds of millions.
Last year an American singer was staying with us (I organized her tour). We, me and my wife, showed her some nice places in Holland. We looked around an old town and by chance walked in to a garden next to a church. It was a nondecript place, some deckchairs, a bicycle here and there, some shrubs and flowers.
Within seconds I felt this deep beautiful energy invading me (it’s difficult to describe the experience of feeling energy to someone that doesn’t know it). I closed my eyes for a few minutes. When I opened them, I looked for and at the other two. My wife was in tears and our guest was meditating on one of the chairs. Later we shared what we had felt.
This is not at all an uncommon thing, and all of the millions of people t