None of GW pictures are photographs - and even if they were - photos can be faked. (Notice you said usually on the faked part.)
Okay, compare this to Christ. If we look at a stack of paintings of GW from different painters we see a striking resemblance between them. This gives credit to him being real.
If we look at paintings of Christ however, we see a striking difference. Some people paint him white, some black. The truth is we have no idea what he looked like. This gives credit to him being an artistic interpretation, not real.
Christ also existed outside of the literature of the bible. And you're right, GW didn't defy the laws of physics. Which is exactly the point. He wasn't God. Christ IS God. You wanted proof, I gave it to you. You choose not to believe it.
Why is it you seem to think that Christ doing the impossible makes it more likely he existed? This just doesn't seem logical to me.
Ditto goes with the Eiffel Tower. Unless you've been there and seen it first hand, you don't know for sure. (Ever see what Tom Cruise did in Mission Impossible? Talk about faking things that look real.)
Haven't seen mission impossible actually (really bad of me ) but I have seen the shots of the Eiffel Tower in the upcoming movie "G.I Joe". It looks great...but still quite fake. Those of us in the multimedia field can pick up on the subtlest little things that make an image fake. It is extraordinarily rare for me to make this mistake.
On top of this I can look at photos of the Eiffel Tower taken years before computer manipulation came into play. I should also take into account the sheer number of photos I can look at simply by punching it into Google. It would have to be some conspiracy to have manipulated literally millions of photos. I am confident the Tower is real.
No, Arch - my examples are spot on.
You asked for evidence of God and I gave it to you. You just don't want to believe it.
I did this whole denial of the evidence process for 35 years and understand where you're coming from.
Sorry Jeff, although a good starting point your examples are little more than wishful thinking. You need a lot more and better evidence to convince a sceptic.