Purkinje images in the eyes of Virgin

[MarieMonteiro]

Hello everybody,

 

I would have a question about the claim that the tilma of the virgin in Guadalupe has Purkinje images in her eyes, that this principle was unknown at the time the painting "appeared", and that it is proof that it was designed by God.

 

I don't know how to insert the image here, but if you type bearded man in Guadalupe eyes in Google you'll find the image of the man they found in the virgin's eyes, and from that image some claims that you can find it with "mathematical precision" three times in both eyes as would the Purkinje images appear. I don't know if that makes sense. They say that two ophtalmologists checked the eyes in 1950 and 1960 and declared that the images followed the principle of the Purkinge images. 

 

 

Can anyone help me to debunk this claim? 

 

I know that the face of the bearded man in the eye can be described as paradeoila, but my concern is that they claim it appears three times in both eyes with mathematical precision. 

 

Thank you very much. And sorry if there are some mistakes, I'm French.

 

 

 

 

[TheRedneckProfessor]

If an omnipotent god intended to demonstrate his existence, don't you think he'd do something slightly more impressive than appearing in grilled cheese sandwiches?  I mean, he could end world hunger, provide a cure for AIDS, or bring about peace on earth.  But instead he can only muster up the ability to appear in a statue's eye?  And we're supposed to believe in him?

[Astreja]

Artists are capable of doing remarkable work with miniatures, and I see nothing supernatural or divine in an alleged "miracle" of this sort.

 

But think of it this way:  If this were true, it casts serious doubts on the character of any god that would bother doing such a silly thing.  Essentially it's like someone playing around with Photoshop all night while ignoring screams for help coming from the next apartment.  I could never respect such a do-nothing lout of a god.

[MarieMonteiro]

8 hours ago, Astreja said:

Artists are capable of doing remarkable work with miniatures, and I see nothing supernatural or divine in an alleged "miracle" of this sort.

 

But think of it this way:  If this were true, it casts serious doubts on the character of any god that would bother doing such a silly thing.  Essentially it's like someone playing around with Photoshop all night while ignoring screams for help coming from the next apartment.  I could never respect such a do-nothing lout of a god.

 

They say it's supernatural because the mathematical formula and the Purkinje images were unknown at the time the painting was done, in the 16th century.

[Astreja]

Depends on what the mathematical formula is, really.  Mathematics has been around for a very long time.

[MarieMonteiro]

2 hours ago, Astreja said:

Depends on what the mathematical formula is, really.  Mathematics has been around for a very long time.

 

Purkinje images were discovered in the 19th century, as well as the mathematical formula to find their place and size in the human eyes. I don't have the mathematical formula, it's a quite complicated one and this is not my area of expertise. I was hoping someone who would know about Purkinje images could help me and explain to me why their claim is false. 

[walterpthefirst]

Hello Marie.

 

 

https://nikhilmattoo.wordpress.com/2018/02/11/google-maps-satellite-captured-lord-shivas-face-on-kailash-mountain/

 

LORD SHIVA's FACE IN MOUNT KAILASH CAPTURED BY GOOGLE EARTH | Time Pass (lucknowtimepass.blogspot.com)

 

 

 

Do you see the face of the Hindu god Shiva on the side of Mount Kailash, a holy mountain in the Himalayas?

 

I do.

 

But do I therefore believe that the god Shiva exists and is real?

 

No.

 

Why don't I believe?

 

Because of this.

 

Pareidolia - Wikipedia

 

Our brains naturally see faces and seem to see recognizable shapes where there are none.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[MarieMonteiro]

21 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Hello Marie.

 

 

https://nikhilmattoo.wordpress.com/2018/02/11/google-maps-satellite-captured-lord-shivas-face-on-kailash-mountain/

 

LORD SHIVA's FACE IN MOUNT KAILASH CAPTURED BY GOOGLE EARTH | Time Pass (lucknowtimepass.blogspot.com)

 

 

 

Do you see the face of the Hindu god Shiva on the side of Mount Kailash, a holy mountain in the Himalayas?

 

I do.

 

But do I therefore believe that the god Shiva exists and is real?

 

No.

 

Why don't I believe?

 

Because of this.

 

Pareidolia - Wikipedia

 

Our brains naturally see faces and seem to see recognizable shapes where there are none.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hello,

 

Thank you for your answer.

 

I understand that the face of the bearded man in the virgin's eyes can be classified as pareidolia. My concern is more that they find this man 6 times in the eyes, 3 times in each eye, and exactly at the position and size that the human eye would do. If it was only once, I'd say pareidolia for sure, but 6 times placed and sized perfectly (or so they say) makes me doubt. What are your thoughts on this? Thank you very much.

 

Marie 

[walterpthefirst]

Hello again Marie.

 

 

Well, let's stop for a minute and see what we've actually got to go on here.

 

All I have to go on is what you've written and if you don't live in Guadeloupe, all you have to go on is (presumably) something you've read or heard about.  Which means that I'm looking at this claim third-hand and you're looking at this claim with second-hand. 

 

Now, did you notice that when I claimed something about Mount Kailash and about Pareidolia, I backed up what I wrote with cited material?  So, can you now do the same please?  Can you please cite where this actual claim is made, so that I can see it for myself?

 

I ask this because, as a sceptic, I am loathe to believe anything extraordinary or supernatural that I cannot check and test for myself, by myself.  At it therefore follows that I'm not going to believe anything extraordinary or supernatural told to me second-hand - because I won't have checked or tested it for myself, by myself.

 

Would you please be so kind as to provide a link to where this claim about the Purkinje images is made?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[MarieMonteiro]

45 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Hello again Marie.

 

 

Well, let's stop for a minute and see what we've actually got to go on here.

 

All I have to go on is what you've written and if you don't live in Guadeloupe, all you have to go on is (presumably) something you've read or heard about.  Which means that I'm looking at this claim third-hand and you're looking at this claim with second-hand. 

 

Now, did you notice that when I claimed something about Mount Kailash and about Pareidolia, I backed up what I wrote with cited material?  So, can you now do the same please?  Can you please cite where this actual claim is made, so that I can see it for myself?

 

I ask this because, as a sceptic, I am loathe to believe anything extraordinary or supernatural that I cannot check and test for myself, by myself.  At it therefore follows that I'm not going to believe anything extraordinary or supernatural told to me second-hand - because I won't have checked or tested it for myself, by myself.

 

Would you please be so kind as to provide a link to where this claim about the Purkinje images is made?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

Sure! I read it there, it's an extract from a book that was published on a christian forum.

 

 

“We are also talking of another impossible phenomenon: the image of the ‘bearded man’ appears three times in the eyes of the ayate [the tilma of Juan Diego], following the laws of Samson-Purkinje with mathematical precision. One image, four millimeters high and one millimeter wide, upright and brilliant, seems to come out of the cloth; a second one, of the same size, the deepest one and the least brilliant, can be perfectly distinguished at the bottom of the eye; and a third one, hardly a millimeter high, is located halfway between the other two and is inverted and displaced toward the left, as it happens in a living human eye… but this is just a piece of cloth.” (Francis Anson, Guadalupe – What Her Eyes Say, p. 109)

 

 

[walterpthefirst]

Thank you Marie.

 

 

Now here's an extract from another book.

 

 

John 20 : 30 & 31

 

30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 

31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

 

 

So, my question to you is this.

 

Should I believe the things claimed in a book about Jesus when I cannot check or test them for myself?

 

 

And a good question you might like to ask yourself is this.

 

Should you believe the things claimed in a book about those Purkinje images when you haven't checked or tested them for yourself?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[MarieMonteiro]

12 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Thank you Marie.

 

 

Now here's an extract from another book.

 

 

John 20 : 30 & 31

 

30 Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. 

31 But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

 

 

So, my question to you is this.

 

Should I believe the things claimed in a book about Jesus when I cannot check or test them for myself?

 

 

And a good question you might like to ask yourself is this.

 

Should you believe the things claimed in a book about those Purkinje images when you haven't checked or tested them for yourself?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

Thank you for your answer.

 

I know you are right, I can't verify his claim, first because I don't have access to the painting since it is heavily guarded by the Church, second because I don't have the knowledge to check his claims, I don't know much about Purkinje images. Maybe I'm too gullible. But I cannot help but be scared by this claim, the eternal "what if he is right?"... Also because I am a very honest person, so I cannot think that this person would be blatantly lying. And Christianity still terrifies me, even though I deconverted in 2020. Thank you for your kind answers and your time, I really appreciate.

 

Marie 

[walterpthefirst]

Not at all, Marie.

 

 

The purpose of this forum is to help and assist those trying to leave religion behind. 

 

You needn't worry about being too gullible either.  Once, we Ex-Christians were too gullible too.  So, please don't chide or blame yourself for still holding to patterns of thinking and feeling that we've all shared in.

 

Now when it comes to the business of blatant lying, please consider this thought. 

 

As well as there being those people who tell the truth and those people who tell lies there is a third group of people - those who unknowingly tell lies because they wrongly believe something is true.  These can be rational and well-meaning, moral people who genuinely believe that something is true.  But they have either been conned by unscrupulous people who are lying or have simply made a mistake about what to believe.

 

Have you considered this third possibility, Marie?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

[MarieMonteiro]

19 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

Not at all, Marie.

 

 

The purpose of this forum is to help and assist those trying to leave religion behind. 

 

You needn't worry about being too gullible either.  Once, we Ex-Christians were too gullible too.  So, please don't chide or blame yourself for still holding to patterns of thinking and feeling that we've all shared in.

 

Now when it comes to the business of blatant lying, please consider this thought. 

 

As well as there being those people who tell the truth and those people who tell lies there is a third group of people - those who unknowingly tell lies because they wrongly believe something is true.  These can be rational and well-meaning, moral people who genuinely believe that something is true.  But they have either been conned by unscrupulous people who are lying or have simply made a mistake about what to believe.

 

Have you considered this third possibility, Marie?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

Thank you for your kind words.

 

I've considered it as well. But I suppose for this particular claim... Because they talk about mathematics, to me it's either true or false, just like 2+2=4 and not 5, do you understand what I mean? So I have difficulties to see how can people disillusione themselves, it either matches or it does not. Plus, this thing about the Purkinje images was found by an ophtalmologist in the 1950s, and another one confirmed it in the 1960s... Some Catholic websites even claim that over 20 ophtalmologists have looked into it and all agree, but maybe they are exaggerating. At least, and that is for sure, the first two ophtalmologists really looked at the painting. And in my mind it's like "those people are professionnal in their field, they know what they are talking about", and doubts, doubts, doubts... Dear, I hope one day I'll fully get over those religious claims.

[walterpthefirst]

Hello Marie,

 

 

Perhaps it would help if you realized that beyond the two basic conditions of True and Untrue there is something else, a third condition?

 

Genuinely believed to be true, but actually untrue.

 

There are many historical examples of this and perhaps the easiest to grasp is the true shape of the planet Earth.  We now know that the Earth is a sphere, but for many thousands of years almost everyone believed it was flat.  Almost all of those believers were entirely genuine in their belief and many of them were good and moral people with no wish to tell lies and no wish to perpetrate an untruth.  And yet, for all of the depth of their belief, they were wrong.

 

Even today, with all that science tells us there are good and moral people who genuinely believe that the Earth is flat.  They are not lying and they are not trying to perpetuate lies.  It's just that there is something within them that cannot accept the idea of a spherical Earth.  So their belief falls into that third category.  Not True and not knowingly Untrue, yet...

 

Genuinely believed by them to be true, but according to the facts, actually untrue.

 

Do you see what I am saying here, Marie?

 

 

Now, if we shift the focus to religion, we can see something similar.

 

Science tells us that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, that it formed from the same nebula (cloud) of dust and gas that gave birth to our Sun and the other planets and that life has evolved here over billions of years.  Yet, there are millions of Young Earth Creationist Christians who reject the science in favour of the words of the bible.  Because the book of Genesis describes god creating the Earth, the Sun and Moon and all life over the space of six days, they believe that this is truth.

 

Once again, many of these people live good and moral lives and do not wish to tell lies or perpetuate lies.  They are not knowingly lying when they reject the science and go with scripture.  It's just that, like the Flat Earthers, there is something withing them them that cannot accept the idea that the universe was not created by god.  So, their beliefs, just like the Flat Earthers, fall into that third category.  Not True and not knowingly Untrue, yet...

 

Genuinely believed by them to be true, but according to the facts, actually untrue.

 

 

Therefore, in the light of these two examples Marie, can you now see which category people who believe in these Purkinje images would fall into?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

[pantheory]

On 1/2/2024 at 10:58 AM, MarieMonteiro said:

Hello everybody,

 

I would have a question about the claim that the tilma of the virgin in Guadalupe has Purkinje images in her eyes, that this principle was unknown at the time the painting "appeared", and that it is proof that it was designed by God.

 

I don't know how to insert the image here, but if you type bearded man in Guadalupe eyes in Google you'll find the image of the man they found in the virgin's eyes, and from that image some claims that you can find it with "mathematical precision" three times in both eyes as would the Purkinje images appear. I don't know if that makes sense. They say that two ophtalmologists checked the eyes in 1950 and 1960 and declared that the images followed the principle of the Purkinge images. 

 

 

Can anyone help me to debunk this claim? 

 

I know that the face of the bearded man in the eye can be described as paradeoila, but my concern is that they claim it appears three times in both eyes with mathematical precision. 

 

Thank you very much. And sorry if there are some mistakes, I'm French.

 

 

 

A bearded man's image in the eye of the virgin is a stretch of the imagination IMHO concerning the related painting. Since there is no objective evidence for the existence of God or Jesus IMHO, maybe this is as good as it gets concerning any such evidence

 

[MarieMonteiro]

4 hours ago, pantheory said:

 

A bearded man's image in the eye of the virgin is a stretch of the imagination IMHO concerning the related painting. Since there is no objective proof of God, maybe this is as good as it gets concerning any proof.

 

 

That's the image I was trying to include to my post but couldn't figure how to do it, thank you for posting it.

 

I know the first image of the bearded man is really not obvious. My concern is more about the claim that they find it three times with "mathematical precision" as would the Purkinje images would appear. But I suppose if first image is already not obvious, then the second and third might be an even bigger stretch.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Let's pretend for a moment that all of this is true.  The ophthalmologists all checked it and confirmed it was real.  The mathematicians all worked out the formulas and equations and all of them proved the same solution.  This thing is 100% genuine.  Would this bearded face in an antique painting be able to end the Russian invasion of Ukraine?  Would corporate greed suddenly turn into economic equality and ensure that the resources, benefits, and social infrastructure were made available to everyone?  Would light bulbs last longer?  Would jock itch medicine finally be effective?

 

Or would the world, more or less, continue on exactly as it has for the past several thousand years?  What use is a god who can paint a picture with "mathematical precision" but can't stop a child from starving to death or a woman from being abused?

[walterpthefirst]

6 hours ago, MarieMonteiro said:

 

That's the image I was trying to include to my post but couldn't figure how to do it, thank you for posting it.

 

I know the first image of the bearded man is really not obvious. My concern is more about the claim that they find it three times with "mathematical precision" as would the Purkinje images would appear. But I suppose if first image is already not obvious, then the second and third might be an even bigger stretch.

 

So have you considered the possibility that I mentioned yesterday, Marie?

 

That the writers of the book genuinely believe that these images are from god, but that they are simply wrong?

[walterpthefirst]

Marie,

 

 

You say that you cannot believe that people are blatantly lying when they make a claim like this.

 

I'm able to show you other examples where religious people ARE blatantly lying about the claims they make.

 

Would you like me to show you these examples?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

MarieMonteiro,    Bonne Année

 

Statistics, when misused, can come to any desired wrong conclusion, even  to a very high degree of certainty. This is often done unintentionally, usually when the input data used has been misinterpreted.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics

[MarieMonteiro]

18 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

Marie,

 

 

You say that you cannot believe that people are blatantly lying when they make a claim like this.

 

I'm able to show you other examples where religious people ARE blatantly lying about the claims they make.

 

Would you like me to show you these examples?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

Hello,

 

I've already heard of religious people blatantly lying. I saw Joe Nickell's investigation into a weeping statue where he found that the priest was tricking everybody to get money. So I know it happens. Though I don't know of several people blatantly lying, as in that case there seems to be at least two ophtalmologists, investigating 10 years apart from each other. 

[MarieMonteiro]

12 hours ago, pantheory said:

MarieMonteiro,    Bonne Année

 

Statistics, when misused, can come to any desired wrong conclusion, even  to a very high degree of certainty. This is often done unintentionally, usually when the input data used has been misinterpreted.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics

 

Thank you!

 

I read somewhere as well that to know the size of one of the image of Purkinje, you need the size of the crystalline lens, which you can only estimate because it's behind the eye. Actually, ophtalmologists usually use the Purkinje image to know the size of the crystalline lens, and not the other way around. So there seems to be some "uncertain" data in their calculation. But again, I'm not an expert, I'm just guessing there are some uncertain data.

[walterpthefirst]

3 hours ago, MarieMonteiro said:

 

Hello,

 

I've already heard of religious people blatantly lying. I saw Joe Nickell's investigation into a weeping statue where he found that the priest was tricking everybody to get money. So I know it happens. Though I don't know of several people blatantly lying, as in that case there seems to be at least two ophtalmologists, investigating 10 years apart from each other. 

 

 

Marie,

 

 

If Christians or other religious people can justify telling lies because they think doing so will serve a higher purpose, then they WILL do so.  Their thinking goes something like this.  "It's better to get people into the kingdom of god for the wrong reasons than to have them burn in hell for any reason."   The end (heaven) justifies the means (lying).

 

There doesn't even have to be money involved in the equation.  As I mentioned earlier, just as good and moral people can believe factually wrong things, so can the same people wrongly believe that evil and immoral behaviours are in fact good and moral ones.  You can see this demonstrated when Christian apologists, believing that every word of the bible is literally true, try to justify the massacres and atrocities ordered by god in the Old Testament.

 

These apologists are otherwise good and moral people, but they have a cognitive blind spot when it comes to the evil and immoral actions of their god.  They will do anything and say anything to excuse him because it's emotionally unacceptable for them to even think that he could do anything evil or immoral.

 

And this cognitive blind spot is probably what allows them to tell lies in the name of Jesus.

 

 

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[pantheory]

9 hours ago, MarieMonteiro said:

 

Thank you!

 

I read somewhere as well that to know the size of one of the image of Purkinje, you need the size of the crystalline lens, which you can only estimate because it's behind the eye. Actually, ophtalmologists usually use the Purkinje image to know the size of the crystalline lens, and not the other way around. So there seems to be some "uncertain" data in their calculation. But again, I'm not an expert, I'm just guessing there are some uncertain data.

 

My guess is that your guessing is totally correct