Author Topic: Fake Sister Lucia Theory? (Read 9591 times)

SerpKerp · « **on:** July 03, 2014, 01:26:05 AM »

Do you think that the fake Sister Lucia theory holds any water?

It seems extraordinary, but it would make sense.

ggreg · « **Reply #1 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:47:03 AM »

No, I think it is utter nonsense made up after the fact to simplify an otherwise very complex world which dim people find it stressful to deal with.

There's zero evidence for it other than some photographs taken years apart. If they "prove" anything then macro evolution is proven by the scant fossil record. Let's at least be consistent here.

Nobody has ever credibly explained how Sister Lucia's fellow cloistered nuns, confessor, close family members were fooled into believing the imposter was the original sister Lucy.

If they replaced your brother or uncle in a monastery and you went for a visit, don't you think you might notice when you talked about the number of strawberries you grew that very hot summer or the name of the cat with one eye they used to feed. How would the imposter be able to know this?

SerpKerp · « **Reply #2 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:55:08 AM »

I thought John Lane believed in it.

TheKnightVigilant · « **Reply #3 on:** July 03, 2014, 03:42:47 AM »

Quote from: ggreg

No, I think it is utter nonsense made up after the fact to simplify an otherwise very complex world which dim people find it stressful to deal with.

There's zero evidence for it other than some photographs taken years apart. If they "prove" anything then macro evolution is proven by the scant fossil record. Let's at least be consistent here.

Nobody has ever credibly explained how Sister Lucia's fellow cloistered nuns, confessor, close family members were fooled into believing the imposter was the original sister Lucy.

If they replaced your brother or uncle in a monastery and you went for a visit, don't you think you might notice when you talked about the number of strawberries you grew that very hot summer or the name of the cat with one eye they used to feed. How would the imposter be able to know this?

How about you explain how a human being's facial morphology can completely transform over the course of a lifetime, even though that's, ya know, impossible according to every single physical anthropologist and maxillofacial surgeon.

I needed major reconstructive surgery to move my jaw a few millimeters, and yet "Sister Lucy's" lower jaw somehow expanded at least 2cm over the course of a few decades, even though the lower jaw actually shrinks with age.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111031114809.htm

I'm sorry, but you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Learn something.

Quote from: TheKnightVigilant

There's absolutely no doubt that the "Sister Lucy" of the year 2000 is a completely different woman.

Anthropologists, maxillofacial surgeons, forensic scientists and other people whose work involves the analysis of the human facial structure have various methods of discerning the identity of an individual on the basis of their facial structure. There are certain points of reference, spatial relationships etc that serve as indentifying marks. "Sister Lucy" 2000 is not Sister Lucy.

A simple point: Sister Lucy 2000 has what is called a class III bite, or an underbite, where the lower jaw protrudes beyond the upper jaw. The original Sister Lucy had a class II bite, the opposite condition, where the lower jaw is recessed in relation to the facial structure.

ggreg · « **Reply #4 on:** July 03, 2014, 07:11:07 AM »

Here is one explanation.

Her diet changed in the Convent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15823276

ggreg · « **Reply #5 on:** July 03, 2014, 07:22:53 AM »

Quote from: ggreg

Here is one explanation.

Her diet changed in the Convent.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15823276

Besides, if the Vatican were going to all the trouble of finding a double ready to spend her entire life in a convent and train her in every minor aspect of the real Lucia's background, memories, accent, patois, then why not make her look alike too?

They certainly had access to plastic surgury in the 1950s capable of changing her jaw shape.

Why leave such a huge clue that someone like you with absolutely no professional expertise whatsoever could detect?

You are the idiot with the big claim, so the onus is on YOU to prove it and counter my argument that her fellow nuns and family members would certainly notice if she got swapped out with an imposter. Were those nuns all in on the conspiracy too? She was allowed visitors from family. Were they in on it too?

Elizabeth · « **Reply #6 on:** July 03, 2014, 09:43:26 AM »

Is my Lobotomy Theory too far-fetched?

I researched the possibilities at one point, and reckoned it was not an impossible theory. The procedure could have been performed in less than 30 minutes at the convent. I think the big lobotomy "surgeon" of the 1940's was in Lisbon at the time.

On the other hand, I consider Sr. Lucia incapable of any form of disobedience to her Superiors of her religious house.

tdrev123 · « **Reply #7 on:** July 03, 2014, 10:38:11 AM »

If you believe that she is the real one, then you believe that one of the most Holiest of people, whom the BVM appeared to, approves on the NO, JPII, Communion in hand, and the NO version of Third Secret......I don't think so...

MyrnaM · « **Reply #8 on:** July 03, 2014, 12:31:49 PM »

I have come to believe they killed the real Sister Lucy, and probably told the family they would kill them too, if they talked.

Nothing surprises me what the Vatican II leaders are capable of doing anymore.

stgobnait · « **Reply #9 on:** July 03, 2014, 12:44:34 PM »

leaving aside conspiricy theorys, i don't believe she's the same woman...... oh wait, that mean's........ :tinfoil:

roscoe · « **Reply #10 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:05:21 PM »

roscoe · « **Reply #11 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:06:52 PM »

Quote from: stgobnait

leaving aside conspiricy theorys, i don't believe she's the same woman...... oh wait, that mean's........ :tinfoil:

What' a 'conspiracy theory'? :confused1:

Binechi · « **Reply #12 on:** July 03, 2014, 01:22:17 PM »

Quote from: tdrev123

If you believe that she is the real one, then you believe that one of the most Holiest of people, whom the BVM appeared to, approves on the NO, JPII, Communion in hand, and the NO version of Third Secret......I don't think so...

Handwriting tells it all. like a fingerprint , you can a whole life history from ones handwriting. The second one was different from the first. The whole thing was a cover up, for some reason. Maybe the whole thing is a Hoax ?//
Our Blessed Mother doesn t deal in cover ups .. My opinion

IllyricumSacrum · « **Reply #13 on:** July 03, 2014, 02:14:49 PM »

I guess I can't believe my lying eyes.

marasmius · « **Reply #14 on:** July 03, 2014, 02:56:49 PM »

I wonder which is the most believable, the faked moon landings, the sightings of Elvis or the fake Sister Lucia? It is hard to choose.