(December 17, 2009 at 1:46 am)chatpilot Wrote: The shroud of Turin has been exposed as a hoax years ago, it's only the bull headed Christians that insists on its authenticity despite the scientific evidence to the contrary. Nice find there Min I love reading about things like this.
Not quite. I'm new here, but I'm sure everyone around here is very science and evidence based, so while I will not attempt to prove the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth that Jesus Christ was buried in, as this would be very hard, if not impossible to scientifically prove beyond a doubt, I will shed light on the claims that the Shroud has proven to be fake.
This is from an hour's worth of research, so this is something anyone can easily find.
Many claim the Shroud was debunked as a Medieval forgery, since it was radio carbon dated to that time period. The debunking of the Shroud has itself been debunked, as has been noted in a couple of peer reviewed scientific journals, mainly by the fact that the piece sampled was not representative of the entire Shroud, and was probably from a patch used during this time period. Supposedly the vanillin content dates it much earlier than this, to atleast 1300 years ago.
Here is one paper discussing this:
Link Removed
The other, more recent paper to supposedly confirm these results is "Analytical Results on Thread Samples Taken from the Raes Sampling Area (Corner) of the Shroud Cloth” by Robert Villarreal (also of Los Alamos National Laboratory). However, this paper does not seem available to the public yet. Much talk of it is here:
Link Removed
This is a paper from Chemistry Today, with similar findings:
Link Removed
And then of course, there is the issue of the weave. I think most here can agree that just because a burial shroud of a different weave was found from the same time period and area, that it hardly confirms the Shroud is a fake.
More credibility can be given to the claim that the type of weave did not exist until much later. And the articles claim that this is scientific fact, yet there is evidence to the contrary, as is discussed in great detail here:
Link Removed
Bottom line:
Don't require lengthy scientific evidence to prove something you believe is wrong, and then go around and lower the standards to prove something you think is right. It's about finding the truth, and not simply confirming your own preconceived notions.
