Ten Hours of Miracles. Thirty-Seven Seconds of Argument.
The Catholic case from miracles has gotten very good. Fatima, Lourdes, Zeitoun, Padre Pio, laboratory-verified Eucharistic hosts, ten-hour videos with primary sources and medical documentation. If you've tried to answer it, you know the problem. Answering one video properly takes about a hundred hours, and then there's another one. This is not a course in answering them faster. It's a course in asking a different question.
A live masterclass, November 2026.
Ā Should I Build This?
If enough people raise a hand, I will. Founding students get it for $47, and it goes up after this cohort. No payment now.
Grant Everything
No naturalistic explanations. No fraud. No demons. Nothing here argues Catholicism is false. Every concession hands the other side something for free, and the argument still runs.
One Question, Four Cases
What did the sign actually answer? Zeitoun, Lanciano, Fatima, Lourdes, worked from real documents. Including the case where my own argument is weakest.
Catholic Sources Throughout
Aquinas, Vatican I, Cardinal Ratzinger's commentary on Fatima, the Vatican's 2024 norms, and the Church's own critical edition of the 1917 interrogations.
You Can't Win By Out-Researching Them
Here's the math. Joe Schmid's Miracles PROVE Catholicism runs about ten hours, with roughly nine and a half on the Catholic dossier. At an hour of research per ten minutes of video, and far more on the technical sections, a full rebuttal runs to something like a hundred hours. That's a month of four-hour days to answer one video. Sampling a few cases to establish a pattern doesn't work either. That's been tried, against someone who reads the primary sources in Portuguese. So most people either concede the field quietly or reach for explanations they can't defend, and get taken apart. There's a third option, and it starts somewhere counterintuitive.
Thirteen Minutes Arguing Against Myself
One chapter of this course is me making the strongest case I can for the position I spend the rest of it disputing. No hedging, no strawman, no winking at the camera. If you can't state an argument better than the people who hold it, you're not ready to disagree with it, and most of what passes for apologetics on both sides is people beating up cardboard. You'll also leave knowing exactly what would prove me wrong. I say it on camera and I mean it. What you get is a ninety-minute recorded masterclass in ten chapters, a workbook with four case dossiers and space to do the work yourself, and a live hour for questions.
Who This Is For
This is for you if you've watched the miracle content and felt the weight of it, if you want a method you can use on cases nobody has analysed yet, and if you'd rather have a good question than a bad answer. It is not for you if you want proof that Catholicism is false, or an argument that the sun was an optical illusion, or a demon hypothesis, or ammunition. I mean that last one. If you leave with a weapon, I've failed.
Founding Students
No payment now, one email when it opens.
