RE: Evidence: The Gathering
July 20, 2015 at 5:45 pm
(This post was last modified: July 20, 2015 at 5:46 pm by Randy Carson.)
Since some have made comments, I'm...
![[Image: 800px-Full_length_negatives_of_the_shrou...50x440.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=shamelesspopery.com%2Fmedia%2F2015%2F07%2F800px-Full_length_negatives_of_the_shroud_of_Turin-450x440.jpg)
In 1988, a scrap of linen was clipped from the shroud and sent to laboratories in Arizona, Oxford, England, and Zurich to be dated using the carbon-14 technique. For the first time, the scientific tests invalidated claims of the shroud’s authenticity. The tests dated the shroud between 1260 and 1390. This fit perfectly with the first documented appearance of the shroud in Lirey, France, in 1353.
Despite the other encouraging evidence, the carbon-14 dating seemed to be conclusive proof that the ancient linen cloth was an ingenious medieval forgery.
However, the mystery of the shroud was not to be solved quite so easily. Further research uncovered a painting that portrayed the shroud, which predated both the documented exhibition in Lirey and the carbon-14 results. Shroud believers suggested that the fire that nearly destroyed the shroud in 1532 could have affected the carbon-14 dating, and closer examination revealed that the area from which the linen was taken for testing was not only the area handled by those displaying the shroud over the centuries, but it had been repaired by almost invisible interweaving in the 14th century.
(IOW, the 1988 test was flawed and invalid.)
Suddenly, the carbon-14 dating did not seem so watertight. Then, in 2012, an Italian academic who had been studying the mystery of the shroud for years released what seems to be the best theory to explain the shroud’s image. Giulio Fanti, an Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at Padua University, reports that the only technique to come close to reproducing the image on the shroud is ultraviolet radiation. However, it required 500,000 volts to produce a replica only a few centimeters long. Fanti calculates that to produce an instant image the size of the shroud would require tens of millions of volts — something which is impossible to produce through natural methods.
(IOW, science cannot explain how the Shroud was created by natural means.)
The irony of the Shroud of Turin’s long history is that it was only in a skeptical, scientific age that the scientific technology has been available to test the shroud — and the more the shroud is investigated, the more the evidence accumulates for its authenticity.
Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/the...z3gTBe2RUw
CORRECTING SOME MISINFORMATION REGARDING
THE SHROUD OF TURIN
THE SHROUD OF TURIN
In 1988, a scrap of linen was clipped from the shroud and sent to laboratories in Arizona, Oxford, England, and Zurich to be dated using the carbon-14 technique. For the first time, the scientific tests invalidated claims of the shroud’s authenticity. The tests dated the shroud between 1260 and 1390. This fit perfectly with the first documented appearance of the shroud in Lirey, France, in 1353.
Despite the other encouraging evidence, the carbon-14 dating seemed to be conclusive proof that the ancient linen cloth was an ingenious medieval forgery.
However, the mystery of the shroud was not to be solved quite so easily. Further research uncovered a painting that portrayed the shroud, which predated both the documented exhibition in Lirey and the carbon-14 results. Shroud believers suggested that the fire that nearly destroyed the shroud in 1532 could have affected the carbon-14 dating, and closer examination revealed that the area from which the linen was taken for testing was not only the area handled by those displaying the shroud over the centuries, but it had been repaired by almost invisible interweaving in the 14th century.
(IOW, the 1988 test was flawed and invalid.)
Suddenly, the carbon-14 dating did not seem so watertight. Then, in 2012, an Italian academic who had been studying the mystery of the shroud for years released what seems to be the best theory to explain the shroud’s image. Giulio Fanti, an Italian professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at Padua University, reports that the only technique to come close to reproducing the image on the shroud is ultraviolet radiation. However, it required 500,000 volts to produce a replica only a few centimeters long. Fanti calculates that to produce an instant image the size of the shroud would require tens of millions of volts — something which is impossible to produce through natural methods.
(IOW, science cannot explain how the Shroud was created by natural means.)
The irony of the Shroud of Turin’s long history is that it was only in a skeptical, scientific age that the scientific technology has been available to test the shroud — and the more the shroud is investigated, the more the evidence accumulates for its authenticity.
Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/the...z3gTBe2RUw
