The Miracle of the Dancing Sun at Fatima which was seen by 70,000 people on October 13th, 1917 has been written about often. But many people continually attempt to explain away the vision of the sun dancing in the sky at a foretold time.
Avelino de Almeida, wrote articles for O Século, Portugal’s most widely-circulated and influential newspaper, which was pro-government and anti-clerical at the time. Almeida’s previous articles had been to satirize the previously reported events at Fatima but here’s what he wrote that day:
“Before the astonished eyes of the crowd, whose aspect was biblical as they stood bare-headed, eagerly searching the sky, the sun trembled, made sudden incredible movements outside all cosmic laws — the sun ‘danced’ according to the typical expression of the people.”
But secularists have amassed an enormous amount of explanations as to why we should not believe our own eyes. Here are the astounding reasons they’ve amassed so we should believe nothing at all special happened in Portugal that great day.
1. Stratospheric Dust. Steuart Campbell, writing for the 1989 edition of Journal of Meteorology, postulated that a cloud of stratospheric dust changed the appearance of the sun on 13 October, making it easy to look at, and causing it to appear yellow, blue, and violet and to spin. In support of his hypothesis, Mr. Campbell reports that a blue and reddened sun was reported in China as documented in 1983.
2. ESP! (Always my favorite) Author Lisa Schwebel claims that the event was a supernatural (but non-miraculous) extra-sensory phenomenon. Schwebel notes that the solar phenomenon reported at Fátima is not unique – there have been several reported cases of high pitched religious gatherings culminating in the sudden and mysterious appearance of lights in the sky.
3. Mock-Sun. Didn’t even know this existed but it’s worth a listen. Joe Nickell, a skeptic and investigator of paranormal phenomena, claims that the position of the phenomenon, as described by the various witnesses, is at the wrong azimuth and elevation to have been the sun. He suggests the cause may have been a sundog. Sometimes referred to as a parhelion or “mock sun”, a sundog is an atmospheric optical phenomenon associated with the reflection/refraction of sunlight by the numerous small ice crystals that make up cirrus or cirrostratus clouds. A sundog is, however, a stationary phenomenon, and would not explain the reported appearance of the “dancing sun”. So Nickell further suggests an explanation for this phenomena may lie in temporary retinal distortion, caused by staring at the intense light and/or the effect of darting the eyes to and fro so as to avoid completely fixed gazing (thus combining image, afterimage and movement). So the people shook their heads and though a mock-sun was dancing. All 70,000? Prety ridiculous, huh?
4. Dust cloud! Paul Simons, in an article entitled “Weather Secrets of Miracle at Fatima”, states that he believes it possible that some of the optical effects at Fatima may have been caused by a cloud of dust from the Sahara.
5. Ye ol mass hallucination theory. Author Kevin McClure claims that the crowd at Cova da Iria may have been expecting to see signs in the sun, as similar phenomena had been reported in the weeks leading up to the miracle. On this basis he believes that the crowd saw what it wanted to see. (Yeah because that happens all the time.) But McClure’s account fails to explain similar reports of people miles away, who by their own testimony were not even thinking of the event at the time, or the sudden drying of people’s sodden, rain-soaked clothes.
6. UFO! It has been argued that the Fatima phenomenon was an alien craft. Of course, either that craft happened to come on the day that the three little children said a miracle would occur. Or the apparitions were all the works of little green men. This all sounds a lot more real than the Church’s explanation.
7. Solar Storm. A gigantic coronal mass ejection (CME) occurred. Every eleven years our sun goes through a period of solar storms and these storms have been with us for
centuries of recorded history. Solar flares emit high-speed particles that
cause the Northern Lights or Aurora Borealis. Well that explains it all right there. Because we all know the Northern Lights look exactly like the Sun dancing. Or not.
8. Peer pressure. Among a uniform people sharing a particular religious belief, it is very easy for individuals to feel social pressure to conform to whatever is seen as a part of “how things should be”, for “true believers”. 70,000 people. That’s pretty strong peer pressure especially for the people who saw it 20 miles away.
9. Not everyone saw it. Astronomers noticed no dancing in the sky from all over the world. The dancing sun was a regional event thus disproving it. A quick question would be the fact that it was a regional event should prove that something out of the ordinary happened. If it happened worldwide it would be written off as simply an astronomical event because the whole world saw it.
10. An Eclipse. These fellas don’t mind contradicting themselves. This would be a very very regional eclipse. Wouldn’t astronomers have noted the eclipse?
Bonus Reason:
11. Evolution. This is sadly from Institute of Physics, Catholic Univeristy of Louvain. Evolution has provided us with the infamous “zoom and loom effect”. It tends to appear when the brain is confronted with the two-dimensional retinal image of an object thatis situated at some unknown distance. The brain will then consider the possibility that it could come closer, by performing an illusory mental zoom, where the apparent size of the object isprogressively increased. This results from the fact that evolution preserved the tendency to take into account the possibility of a dangerous approach: a rapid evasive action could bebeneficial for survival. When the “idea” of an approach does not lead to any real danger, theperceived object returns to its normal place. Thus the dancing sun. Amazing. 70,000 people thought the Sun was a predator coming to eat them. When they realized the Sun had no teeth they “zoomed and loomed” it back to where it belonged. That might just be my favorite one.
So after listening to these level-headed scientists(?) explain away Fatima hasn’t it convinced you to join the Richard Dawkins fan club? Me neither.
October 15, 2007 at 12:05 am
“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don’t, no proof is possible.”
October 15, 2007 at 9:37 pm
I believe Chesterton made a remark to the effect that once people cease to believe in God, it isn’t that they believe in nothing. They’ll believe in anything.
October 15, 2007 at 10:07 pm
When you remove God from your life he leaves a rather large God-shaped hole. And people frantically try to fill it.
October 16, 2007 at 9:56 pm
Yes for those who believe no proof is necessary. That’s the problem. But exactly how do solar phenomenon/hallucinations have anything to do with the truth of Catholic doctrine. I cuold just as easily say they prove the reality of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Anyway it would be a childish god who revealed himself in a sky light show. I think asinine would be the right word.
October 16, 2007 at 11:30 pm
All Hail the Flying Spaghetti Monster! Dude, just try to be a little considerate when you’re here. Thanks.
October 17, 2007 at 12:17 am
Private revelation should not be examined as “evidence” in a theological sense. Rather, it is an aid to the faith of those who experience.
However, insofar as this miracle may have happened as a revelation to a particular set of people, there is also no reason why it would have to have been observable to people on a larger scale.
October 17, 2007 at 1:28 am
What?
January 24, 2008 at 4:02 pm
see this link.
http://www.ovnis.atfreeweb.com/5b_fatima_apparitions_sun.htm
March 27, 2008 at 10:45 am
lol Richard Dawkins Fanclub! It’s interesting to note that the only organisation (In the loose sense of the word) to officially support Fatima is the Catholic Church. But Atheism backs these explanations tooth and nail…. and they claim to be completely rational in doing so….. forgive my language, but WTF?
October 8, 2009 at 5:14 am
Rather than try to explain it, isn't it ok to just say "we have no explanation because of a lack of information"? The phenomenon, whatever it was, proves nothing. The fact that we don't have a satisfactory answer does not prove god. It simply means we don't have enough information to explain it. To simply chalk it up to god is rather lazy. Far-fetched explanations like ESP or UFOs are unlikely. But then again, so is the idea of god.
October 14, 2009 at 2:32 pm
And this is not even a matter of belief i.e. no faith is required because it has been witnessed and reported objectively by the secular media.
Then again, the Lord did say that even if someone comes back from the dead, certain people will not believe. So, what else is new?
BTW, there's a whole school of thought explaining away the miracles in Scriptures e.g. the chosen people crossing the sea of Reeds during low tide.
October 14, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Coincidentally, I saw a sun-dog the other morning at sunrise. Weirdest thing, I could see the sun just coming over the mountains, but I could also see a bright orange ball about 15 degrees above the horizon.
October 14, 2009 at 4:05 pm
A halo appeared over Moscow yesterday:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1219425/Pictured-The-luminous-halo-shaped-cloud-captured-hovering-Moscow.html?ITO=1490
FSM strikes again!
October 14, 2009 at 4:10 pm
I always find it amazing that as a Catholic, things like Fatima don't really faze me. Of course being a Catholic I can also say that things like evolution or, indeed, the sciences don't bother me either. I am free to accept or reject anything I wish (save for Catholic dogma, which make's logical sense if I wish to call myself a Catholic!).
If one accepts that God does indeed exist and is creator of the universe, one would accept that He has the natural right to do with it as He likes.
How unlike the atheist! Close minded to any possibility that even mentions God! How blinded to anything outside the realms of their "science"! Where once we as a culture would look at things like Theology and Philosophy as subjects to be studied and talked of seriously, these "Neo-Atheist's" (Who honestly aren't so much new as just louder then before) mock and put down these paths of learning!
We shouldn't be surprised. When all that is left to a person is absolute oblivion of anything of worth, it makes it far more easier to simply ignore what one doesn't want to see.
October 14, 2009 at 4:34 pm
Yes, Bill, you COULD say the flying Spaghetti Monster was proving his existence as long as there was a crowd of 100,000 promised a miracle from him at the very same day, very same hour over on the next hill. Saying so would be incredibly childish, but you could say it.
The thing about modern miracles to me, frankly, is that they require a trust in the common man that atheists just don't seem capable of.
Ancient man clung to his mysterious god that he couldn't hope to understand, we cling to our teacups. I'm so proud.
October 14, 2009 at 4:41 pm
I always find it amazing that as a Catholic, things like Fatima don't really faze me. Of course being a Catholic I can also say that things like evolution or, indeed, the sciences don't bother me either. I am free to accept or reject anything I wish (save for Catholic dogma, which make's logical sense if I wish to call myself a Catholic!).
There is a Chesterton quote about that that goes (something like) if I believe in an immortal soul, I don't have to think much about it, but if I don't believe it, I must not think about it. In other words I'm stuck in the same trap that the challange not to think about a purple elephant for the next five minutes. We see this played out in the scoffers' inability to have a conversation without spewing insults that betrays an obsession with the supposedly non-existent.
October 14, 2009 at 6:23 pm
William, thanks for pointing out the thing many seem to miss.
Any random event doesn't work as evidence in support of God, but the dancing of the sun wasn't random. People didn't see the sun dance and say "it must have been God". The children at Fatima were told in advance, and that makes a huge difference. It's not applying the "God of the Gaps" after the fact, saying "we don't know what happened, so it must have been God". But that's how many atheists (and those who don't believe in miracles) treat it.
October 14, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Regarding author Lisa Schwebel's theory in #2 — Woodstock doesn't count as a religious experience.
October 14, 2009 at 8:19 pm
Bill – I agree with you. I don't see how a "dancing sun" furthers or validates Catholic dogma in any way. Rather than a sun "dancing", why not an image of Jesus Himself? Or God's hand coming down in blessing? Or a cross? For me it just doesn't add up. But if it brings anyone who believes in a dancing sun closer to God, then kudos.
October 14, 2009 at 9:22 pm
In The God Delusion, Dawkins couldn't explain the Fatima vision(s) away (yes, I read the book). He sort of brushed over it.
Thanks for informing on the latest reasons.
gbm3