The Cokeville Miracle Movie - True Story That Will Turn Any Atheist Into a Believer!

[Winston]

Wow. My friend Alex @halnovemila recommended this movie to me called "The Cokeville Miracle" and I just saw it. It's a true story and very mind blowing and astounding and will turn any atheist such as @Yohan or @galii away from their atheism. It's a must see and will leave you speechless. @MrMan will love it. It validates his faith. See trailer below. Fortunately the whole movie is up on YouTube. See below. I wonder why this story isn't more well known. It's one of the most miraculous stories you will ever hear that is actually true too.

Trailer and IMDB info:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3877296/

Full movie:



@halnovemila and @publicduende this version of the movie below has Italian subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eaAWZVhoP0

Segment on Unsolved Mysteries about the Cokeville MIracle.

[gsjackson]

Cokesville is a Mormon community. I once talked to a Mormon man who seemed perfectly sensible. Was an MD and an adjunct prof at the local junior college. He claimed he had seen God the father in the Mormon temple in Dallas. Not sure what point I'm making, but whether real or imaginary, perhaps there's a tendency in that church to see supernatural divine beings. It is part of their doctrine that supernatural beings take human form.

[galii]

Wow. My friend Alex @halnovemila recommended this movie to me called "The Cokeville Miracle" and I just saw it. It's a true story and very mind blowing and astounding and will turn any atheist such as @Yohan or @galii away from their atheism. It's a must see and will leave you speechless. @MrMan will love it. It validates his faith. See trailer below. Fortunately the whole movie is up on YouTube. See below. I wonder why this story isn't more well known. It's one of the most miraculous stories you will ever hear that is actually true too.

Trailer and IMDB info:

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3877296/

Full movie:



@halnovemila and @publicduende this version of the movie below has Italian subtitles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eaAWZVhoP0

Segment on Unsolved Mysteries about the Cokeville MIracle.

For a 'truther' you lie quite a lot Winston. lol.
You know these kind of crap don't phase me or most atheists.
You are wasting everybodies time with this crap. THANKS GOD the AI saves time:

AI:

The movie is based on a true story, but it is not a documentary. It is a dramatization that may have embellished or distorted some facts to make the story more appealing or sensational. For example, the movie portrays David Young as a former town marshal of Cokeville, but in reality he was only a part-time police officer who was fired after less than a year1. The movie also shows Young testing his bomb on an old bus, but there is no evidence that he ever did that2.
The movie relies heavily on the testimonies of the children who survived the hostage crisis, who claimed that they saw angels or other heavenly beings during the ordeal. However, these testimonies are not reliable or verifiable, as they could have been influenced by trauma, suggestion, imagination, or social pressure. Some of the children may have also changed or embellished their stories over time to fit their religious beliefs or expectations. For example, one of the children said that he saw his grandmother among the angels, but later admitted that he only recognized her from a photograph3.
The movie presents the outcome of the hostage crisis as a miracle, implying that God intervened to save the lives of the children and teachers. However, this is a fallacious argument that ignores the natural and human factors that contributed to the outcome. For example, the bomb was poorly constructed and did not detonate properly, reducing its impact and allowing most of the hostages to escape4. The bomb also went off prematurely because Doris Young accidentally triggered it when she tried to adjust it on her husband’s lap. Moreover, the movie does not address the problem of evil, which asks why God would allow such a horrific event to happen in the first place, or why he would not intervene to prevent other tragedies that claim innocent lives.
The movie appeals to emotion rather than reason, using music, cinematography, and dialogue to manipulate the audience’s feelings and reactions. The movie also uses confirmation bias, which is the tendency to interpret evidence in a way that confirms one’s preexisting beliefs or expectations. For example, the movie shows Ron Hartley, a skeptical cop who lost his faith, as having a change of heart after hearing his children’s stories and witnessing their miraculous recovery. However, this does not prove that God exists or that he performed a miracle; it only shows that Hartley was emotionally affected by his personal experience and chose to believe what he wanted to believe.
These are some of the reasons why as an atheist you will not care about this movie.

[Winston]

Galii,
You dummy. Denial is not the same as debunking. AI can say anything, it doesn't change the facts of the case. Children also do not lie. Everyone knows that. Try to ask a child to lie for you. Just watch the movie. It will change your atheism for sure. I didn't tell you to ask AI. I told you to watch the film.

If not, look up Dr. Stephen Meyer. No atheist can debunk him or debate him. They all run from him in fear because he exposes them as being 100 percent against reality and have nothing to stand on.

[galii]

Galii,
You dummy. Denial is not the same as debunking. AI can say anything, it doesn't change the facts of the case. Children also do not lie. Everyone knows that. Try to ask a child to lie for you. Just watch the movie. It will change your atheism for sure. I didn't tell you to ask AI. I told you to watch the film.

If not, look up Dr. Stephen Meyer. No atheist can debunk him or debate him. They all run from him in fear because he exposes them as being 100 percent against reality and have nothing to stand on.

Why can't you stop lying? How often did you say this movie will change atheists. Or this movie debunks globe earth. How often? It was always wrong. It just made you look like a Bullshido master. You know this crap does not phase me but you still use this retarded fake marketing language: This movie will change you bla bla.

I may watch the movie another time to study human stupidity.

[halnovemila]

The AI reply is honest but not relevant.
As it's the typical reply of atheists which are that by choice not by reason.
It's not relevant if the main character was actually a police officer or not and if the kids testimony of what they have seen it's fully reliable or not.
Actually the role of the main character, the police officer who "lost faith" is indeed that of the classic "atheist skeptic" which doubts, as a police officer should do during an investigations, the reliability of the kids testimonies.
But the "miracle" it's not that the kids have seen or not angels or already past away persons, before the bomb blew up, the miracle it's that despite the explosion and the box with gun cartridges in fire and bullets flying randomly everywhere, no one has died or badly injured.
That's what the AI missed to point out (which probably because the question posed to the AI was such to ask a reply that pleases an atheist perspective).
However, this stories, despite true and documented (like that of the girl with terminal disease which accidentally fell from ten feet head on and everyone was believe she died but she didn't and instead she healed from the incurable disease she had before the accident) don't have by themselves alone the objective strength to convince someone that God exists and Christian religion is true and that ghosts and angels exists and afterlife exits, there's no hard evidence for that claims and never will be because their reality, by definition, it's beyond this real world, and therefore in this world can't found any objective evidence.
The only record available to us is the testimony of those who "have seen" but, testimonies are, at best, to be considered clues, not evidence.
So, a miracle by itself it's however an objective clue about something supernatural that can operate in our reality.
As usual, and similar to the highly debated Amanda Fox case, a single clue can be easily dismissed as a coincidence, but a sufficient number of multiple converging clues can build the strength of an evidence.
So, as of today, the problem atheists have is that they intentionally ignore all the available clues, claiming that reasons asks to believe only to evidences.
With such kind of approach it's easily predictable that even thousands of clues wouldn't change a bit their belief framework about all that it's beyond matter, such as transcendent, metaphysical, and spiritual.
If they are wrong they'll likely know after death.

[galii]

The AI reply is honest but not relevant.
As it's the typical reply of atheists which are that by choice not by reason.
It's not relevant if the main character was actually a police officer or not and if the kids testimony of what they have seen it's fully reliable or not.
Actually the role of the main character, the police officer who "lost faith" is indeed that of the classic "atheist skeptic" which doubts, as a police officer should do during an investigations, the reliability of the kids testimonies.
But the "miracle" it's not that the kids have seen or not angels or already past away persons, before the bomb blew up, the miracle it's that despite the explosion and the box with gun cartridges in fire and bullets flying randomly everywhere, no one has died or badly injured.
That's what the AI missed to point out (which probably because the question posed to the AI was such to ask a reply that pleases an atheist perspective).
However, this stories, despite true and documented (like that of the girl with terminal disease which accidentally fell from ten feet head on and everyone was believe she died but she didn't and instead she healed from the incurable disease she had before the accident) don't have by themselves alone the objective strength to convince someone that God exists and Christian religion is true and that ghosts and angels exists and afterlife exits, there's no hard evidence for that claims and never will be because their reality, by definition, it's beyond this real world, and therefore in this world can't found any objective evidence.
The only record available to us is the testimony of those who "have seen" but, testimonies are, at best, to be considered clues, not evidence.
So, a miracle by itself it's however an objective clue about something supernatural that can operate in our reality.
As usual, and similar to the highly debated Amanda Fox case, a single clue can be easily dismissed as a coincidence, but a sufficient number of multiple converging clues can build the strength of an evidence.
So, as of today, the problem atheists have is that they intentionally ignore all the available clues, claiming that reasons asks to believe only to evidences.
With such kind of approach it's easily predictable that even thousands of clues wouldn't change a bit their belief framework about all that it's beyond matter, such as transcendent, metaphysical, and spiritual.
If they are wrong they'll likely know after death.

Hi hal I used AI in order not to waste time with Winston's 'trolling'. Btw why are you not active in the flat earth discussion? There are many debates on youtube aswell. Last time I said to you in the PH it is not the right time. Nowadays my brain works a bit bette without the distraction. Btw how is it going?

[Winston]

Galii,
You dummy. Denial is not the same as debunking. AI can say anything, it doesn't change the facts of the case. Children also do not lie. Everyone knows that. Try to ask a child to lie for you. Just watch the movie. It will change your atheism for sure. I didn't tell you to ask AI. I told you to watch the film.

If not, look up Dr. Stephen Meyer. No atheist can debunk him or debate him. They all run from him in fear because he exposes them as being 100 percent against reality and have nothing to stand on.

Why can't you stop lying? How often did you say this movie will change atheists. Or this movie debunks globe earth. How often? It was always wrong. It just made you look like a Bullshido master. You know this crap does not phase me but you still use this retarded fake marketing language: This movie will change you bla bla.

I may watch the movie another time to study human stupidity.

How would you know? You never even saw the movie. You lazy bum. Lol. All you did was quote from some dumb AI bot. The AI post contained nothing but speculation. No logic or evidence. It also contradicted the facts in the movie. The bomb was not defective. It was cut cleanly by some invisible force. It showed the wires cut by an unknown force when the angels intervened. It's obvious what happened. Why can't you analyze things from an objective and unbiased and neutral standpoint for once? You are nothing bias, bias, bias. Never objective.

[galii]

Galii,
You dummy. Denial is not the same as debunking. AI can say anything, it doesn't change the facts of the case. Children also do not lie. Everyone knows that. Try to ask a child to lie for you. Just watch the movie. It will change your atheism for sure. I didn't tell you to ask AI. I told you to watch the film.

If not, look up Dr. Stephen Meyer. No atheist can debunk him or debate him. They all run from him in fear because he exposes them as being 100 percent against reality and have nothing to stand on.

Why can't you stop lying? How often did you say this movie will change atheists. Or this movie debunks globe earth. How often? It was always wrong. It just made you look like a Bullshido master. You know this crap does not phase me but you still use this retarded fake marketing language: This movie will change you bla bla.

I may watch the movie another time to study human stupidity.

How would you know? You never even saw the movie. You lazy bum. Lol. All you did was quote from some dumb AI bot. The AI post contained nothing but speculation. No logic or evidence. It also contradicted the facts in the movie. The bomb was not defective. It was cut cleanly by some invisible force. It showed the wires cut by an unknown force when the angels intervened. It's obvious what happened. Why can't you analyze things from an objective and unbiased and neutral standpoint for once? You are nothing bias, bias, bias. Never objective.

I watched things from the past where you said it will change bla bla. You should stop this garbage hyper marketing language. It is annoying and wrong. You are the lazy one when you challenge science with flat earth. When I go a bit deeper you are too lazy to try to understand.
Objectively 99% per cent of things you post as video is bullshido garbage.

[mahayana]

Galii,
You dummy. Denial is not the same as debunking. AI can say anything, it doesn't change the facts of the case. Children also do not lie. Everyone knows that. Try to ask a child to lie for you. Just watch the movie. It will change your atheism for sure. I didn't tell you to ask AI. I told you to watch the film.

If not, look up Dr. Stephen Meyer. No atheist can debunk him or debate him. They all run from him in fear because he exposes them as being 100 percent against reality and have nothing to stand on.

Why can't you stop lying? How often did you say this movie will change atheists. Or this movie debunks globe earth. How often? It was always wrong. It just made you look like a Bullshido master. You know this crap does not phase me but you still use this retarded fake marketing language: This movie will change you bla bla.

I may watch the movie another time to study human stupidity.

How would you know? You never even saw the movie. You lazy bum. Lol. All you did was quote from some dumb AI bot. The AI post contained nothing but speculation. No logic or evidence. It also contradicted the facts in the movie. The bomb was not defective. It was cut cleanly by some invisible force. It showed the wires cut by an unknown force when the angels intervened. It's obvious what happened. Why can't you analyze things from an objective and unbiased and neutral standpoint for once? You are nothing bias, bias, bias. Never objective.

I watched things from the past where you said it will change bla bla. You should stop this garbage hyper marketing language. It is annoying and wrong. You are the lazy one when you challenge science with flat earth. When I go a bit deeper you are too lazy to try to understand.
Objectively 99% per cent of things you post as video is bullshido garbage.

The reason we are confident that the earth is not a spinning ball is because of what we actually see and experience. The earth appears to be flat and non-moving. As far as you can see the earth looks flat. If there is a curve then where is it?