Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
258
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 11:43 am
Quote: The 1988 carbon dating of the Shroud was invalidated by flawed sampling.
Wrong, you dumb fuck. Face it Randy. What you know about C14 dating could be written on a postage stamp.
http://www.science20.com/terminus_post_q...ck_its_box
Quote:There are some people who continue to insist that the radiocarbon dating of the shroud must be wrong, by invoking explanations ranging from the fact that the wrong area was sampled (despite being selected by textile specialists), and that something in the way the shroud was handled or treated could have resulted in contamination. In the original 1989 report, the three different labs that had subsamples of the shroud tried a variety of pretreatment and cleaning methods. No matter what pretreatment method was used, the dates all turned out to be the same. The 1988 analyses were also performed alongside similar pieces of cloth and linen which had previously been dated using other methods. All the dates came out correct.
The people who are asking us to accept that the radiocarbon dates are wrong are either asking us to reject radiocarbon dating altogether, or to believe that there is something special about the cloth of the Shroud of Turin that makes it unlike any other material ever dated. The implied assumption is that there is just something inherently funky about Shroud Carbon. After turning water into wine, and curing lepers, doesn't sticking a few extra carbon-14 atoms on a piece of cloth seem pretty easy?
Fuck your fucking "relics".
Posts: 4705
Threads: 38
Joined: April 5, 2015
Reputation:
65
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 11:52 am
Always a good laugh when lunatics try to use science to justify their delusions 
![[Image: rySLj1k.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i.imgur.com%2FrySLj1k.png)
If you have any serious concerns, are being harassed, or just need someone to talk to, feel free to contact me via PM
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 3:56 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 1:12 am)Minimalist Wrote: Israeli archaeologist, Shimon Gibson, found an actual first century shroud in an actual tomb in Jerusalem. Oddly, it is consistent with the bible bullshit which noted separate wrappings and not one big piece of cloth.
Wouldn't this be another example of the New Testament authors having accurate knowledge of first-century Jewish culture?
And if so, wouldn't this suggest that the NT was written earlier than mythicists normally admit?
And if the author of gJohn was reliable in this small detail (among numerous others that have been archaeologically verified), doesn't this general reliability of the author suggest that he can be deemed reliable regarding the life, death and resurrection of Jesus as a whole?
Posts: 7318
Threads: 75
Joined: April 18, 2015
Reputation:
72
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 4:18 pm
It's been two weeks already?
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 4:35 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 11:43 am)Minimalist Wrote: What you know about C14 dating could be written on a postage stamp.
Not if the stamp is very small. ![[Image: wink.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=forums.catholic.com%2Fimages%2Fsmilies%2Fwink.gif)
![[Image: carbon-14.gif]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=s.hswstatic.com%2Fgif%2Fcarbon-14.gif)
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 4:43 pm
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 5466
Threads: 36
Joined: November 10, 2014
Reputation:
53
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 4:43 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 4:18 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: It's been two weeks already?
I know, man. I know.
"I was thirsty for everything, but blood wasn't my style" - Live, "Voodoo Lady"
Posts: 7568
Threads: 20
Joined: July 26, 2013
Reputation:
54
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 5:27 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 4:43 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: (September 14, 2015 at 4:18 pm)Neimenovic Wrote: It's been two weeks already?
I know, man. I know.
*Sighs and pours a stiff drink*
Posts: 2087
Threads: 65
Joined: August 30, 2015
Reputation:
24
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 6:09 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 3:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Wouldn't this be another example of the New Testament authors having accurate knowledge of first-century Jewish culture?
And if so, wouldn't this suggest that the NT was written earlier than mythicists normally admit?
And if the author of gJohn was reliable in this small detail (among numerous others that have been archaeologically verified), doesn't this general reliability of the author suggest that he can be deemed reliable regarding the life, death and resurrection of Jesus as a whole?
It doesn't suggest he's reliable at all, nor does it suggest when the bible was written. We don't know how long the custom persisted, and how widespread it was. I do find it interesting however that you're willing to accept this as evidence for the bible being reliable, but still are ready to accept the Shroud of Turin as the burial cloth of Jesus.
Posts: 2447
Threads: 19
Joined: May 13, 2015
Reputation:
8
RE: Saint Peter's Bones
September 14, 2015 at 6:30 pm
(September 14, 2015 at 6:09 pm)Cecelia Wrote: (September 14, 2015 at 3:56 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Wouldn't this be another example of the New Testament authors having accurate knowledge of first-century Jewish culture?
And if so, wouldn't this suggest that the NT was written earlier than mythicists normally admit?
And if the author of gJohn was reliable in this small detail (among numerous others that have been archaeologically verified), doesn't this general reliability of the author suggest that he can be deemed reliable regarding the life, death and resurrection of Jesus as a whole?
It doesn't suggest he's reliable at all, nor does it suggest when the bible was written. We don't know how long the custom persisted, and how widespread it was. I do find it interesting however that you're willing to accept this as evidence for the bible being reliable, but still are ready to accept the Shroud of Turin as the burial cloth of Jesus.
Why is that interesting?
Does John or any of the other gospels specify exactly how many linen cloths were used?
But again, this thread is supposed to be about the bones of Peter which may have been found in the necropolis under St. Peter's Basilica.
|
