The shroud of turin

[Abaddon_ire]

<snip the BS>

All of that has been demonstrated to be false over and over again. Why are you dredging this utter nonsense up yet again?

[Rev. Rye]

You're starting your defense of the Shroud of Turin by talking about blood stains... when Jewish custom was (and still is) to cleanse bloodied bodies before burial. And bodies don't bleed after death.

It's also worth noting that the type of herringbone weave in the Shroud is unheard of in textiles in First Century Israel , especially in burial shrouds. In addition, it's been tested multiple times and tested as being from the medieval era.

---

While there was a relatively recent claim that fibers from the cloth have been dated to between 280 BC and 220 AD (by Giulio Fanti), it's not taken seriously, partly due to the lack of peer review, partly because they used methods (Spectroscopy and infrared dating) that aren't suited for ancient objects, and partly because there's no guarantee that the fibrils tested are even from the shroud. It's not even taken seriously by the custodians of the fucking shroud. To quote Archbishop Nosiglia, the official custodian of the Shroud, "As there is no degree of safety on the authenticity of the materials on which these experiments were carried out [on] the shroud cloth, the shroud's custodians cannot recognize any serious value to the results of these alleged experiments."

---

TL;DR: The Shroud of Turin is a lot less meaningful method of "proving" Christianity than it might seem at first glance.

Bodies don't bleed after death?

Are you high? Or just ignorant?


Gravity, son.... Gravity.


I have a big drip tray I put under the deer I butcher and hang in my walk in cooler.

They only quit dripping blood if I run the compressor too long and turn them into a Deersicle....

Good point, I phrased it poorly. That said, in the context of preparing a crucified body for burial (including washing), it still stands: once they clean the body, it's unlikely to bleed again once you wrap it in a shroud, particularly in the same sort of wounds inflicted during crucifixion, which is what the OP claimed.

[brewer]

<snip the BS>

All of that has been demonstrated to be false over and over again. Why are you dredging this utter nonsense up yet again?

He has a really really big fear of not getting into catholic heaven.

[onlinebiker]

Only a goofy religitard would find positive verifification of the most exaggerated claims ever made in a piece of cast off dirty laundy....

[ignoramus]

Well at least the magic sun wiggle wiggle at Fatima is real!
God's got that going for him, right!

[Otangelo]

Wasn't this debunked like 40 years ago?

No. 

Age of the shroud of turin

http://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1688-shroud-of-turin#7139

An instructive inter-laboratory comparison: The 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
Accepted 24 September 2019
The Shroud is unique because on one surface it contains clearly visible front and back images of a man, apparently crucified. Quite apart from any religious significance, the Shroud became, and remains, the focus of scientific inquiry because it is not known how the images on it were formed.

Most recently Casabianca et al. (2019), based on information obtained after a legal filing with the British Museum, showed that some of the original Shroud date measurements reported by the three laboratories to the British Museum were modified from their original ‘raw’ laboratory values and transformed into their published form using an unstated methodology.

Our review and analysis of the Shroud radiocarbon data reveal a significant shortcoming in the original report by Damon et al. (1989). The shortcoming begins with the lack of adherence to the protocol that W-W define for combining the inter-laboratory data sets.

Rogers (2005) proposed a method for cross checking the dates of ancient textiles by measuring the loss of vanillin from residual lignin at the growth nodes of linen fibers. The tests he performed on the Shroud threads suggested to him a much greater age than the results Damon et al.

Fanti et al. (2013) developed a series of relationships between characteristics of fiber over time and a method of estimating the age of the fabric. He subsequently applied these techniques to a series of fibers extracted from the Shroud and derived an estimated calendar age of 90 AD +/− 200 yrs (Fanti et al., 2015).

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...1865#b0025

Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin 
The major problem in estimating the age of the shroud is the fact that the rate law is exponential; i.e., the maximum diurnal temperature is much more important than is the lowest storage temperature. However, some reasonable storage temperatures can be considered to give a range of predicted ages. If the shroud had been stored at a constant 25 ◦C, it would have taken about 1319 years to lose a conservative 95% of its vanillin. At 23 ◦C, it would have taken about 1845 years. At 20 ◦C, it would take about 3095 years. If the shroud had been produced between a.d. 1260 and 1390, as indicated by the radiocarbon analyses, lignin should be easy to detect. A linen produced in a.d. 1260 would have retained about 37% of its vanillin in 1978. The Raes threads, the Holland cloth, and all other medieval linens gave the test for vanillin wherever lignin could be observed on growth nodes. The disappearance of all traces of vanillin from the lignin in the shroud indicates a much older age than the radiocarbon laboratories reported
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF

---

The Shroud of Turin is a painting and dates from the late 14th century.

Boru

How did the Turin Shroud get its image?






1. It's a painting 1
If this were true, it should be possible to identify the pigments used by chemical analysis, just as conservators can do for the paintings of Old Masters. But the Sturp team found no evidence of any pigments or dyes on the cloth in sufficient amounts to explain the image. Nor are there any signs of it being rendered in brush strokes. In fact the image on the linen is barely visible to the naked eye, and wasn't identified at all until 1898, when it became apparent in the negative image of a photograph taken by Secondo Pia, an amateur Italian photographer. The faint coloration of the flax fibres isn't caused by any darker substance being laid on top or infused into them - it's the very material of the fibres themselves that has darkened. And in contrast to most dyeing or painting methods, the colouring cannot be dissolved, bleached or altered by most standard chemical agents. The Sturp group asserted that the image is the real form of a "scourged, crucified man… not the product of an artist". There are genuine bloodstains on the cloth, and we even know the blood group (AB, if you're interested). There are traces of human DNA too, although it is badly degraded.
That didn't prevent the American independent chemical and microscopy consultant, Walter McCrone, who collaborated with the Sturp team, from asserting that the red stains attributed to blood were in fact very tiny particles of the red pigment iron oxide, or red ochre. Like just about every other aspect of the shroud, McCrone's evidence is disputed; few now credit it. Another idea is that the image is a kind of rubbing made from a bas-relief statue, or perhaps imprinted by singeing the fabric while it lay on top of such a bas-relief - but the physical and chemical features of the image don't support this.

[The Architect Of Fate]

So a wall of text of you just repeating the same flawed points 

[Otangelo]

You're starting your defense of the Shroud of Turin by talking about blood stains... when Jewish custom was (and still is) to cleanse bloodied bodies before burial. And bodies don't bleed after death.

It's also worth noting that the type of herringbone weave in the Shroud is unheard of in textiles in First Century Israel , especially in burial shrouds. In addition, it's been tested multiple times and tested as being from the medieval era.

---

While there was a relatively recent claim that fibers from the cloth have been dated to between 280 BC and 220 AD (by Giulio Fanti), it's not taken seriously, partly due to the lack of peer review, partly because they used methods (Spectroscopy and infrared dating) that aren't suited for ancient objects, and partly because there's no guarantee that the fibrils tested are even from the shroud. It's not even taken seriously by the custodians of the fucking shroud. To quote Archbishop Nosiglia, the official custodian of the Shroud, "As there is no degree of safety on the authenticity of the materials on which these experiments were carried out [on] the shroud cloth, the shroud's custodians cannot recognize any serious value to the results of these alleged experiments."

---

TL;DR: The Shroud of Turin is a lot less meaningful method of "proving" Christianity than it might seem at first glance.

THE SHROUD AS AN ANCIENT TEXTILE




Below is a summary of scientific and historical evidence supporting the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin as the ancient burial cloth of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.
by J. Michael Fischer, adapted from the original article by John C. Iannone[

Stitching used to sew on the 3-inch wide side piece onto the main Shroud is nearly identical to that found at Masada which was destroyed in 73-74 AD. The size of the Shroud being very close to 2 by 8 cubits - the ancient unit of measurement 

The Shroud is a linen cloth woven in a 3-over-1 herringbone pattern, and measures 14'3" x 3'7".  These dimensions correlate with ancient measurements of 2 cubits x 8 cubits - consistent with loom technology of the period.  The finer weave of 3-over-1 herringbone is consistent with the New Testament statement that the "sindon" (or shroud) was purchased by Joseph of Arimathea, who was a wealthy man.

In 1532, there was a fire in the church in Chambery, France, where the Shroud was being kept.  Part of the metal storage case melted and fell on the cloth, leaving burns, and efforts to extinguish the fire left water stains.  Yet the image of the man was hardly touched.
In 1534, nuns sewed patches over the fire-damaged areas and attached a full-size support cloth to the back of the Shroud.  This became known as the "Holland" backing cloth.
The Shroud was moved to Turin in 1578, where it remains to this day.

In 2002, a team of experts did restoration work, such as removing the patches from 1534 and replacing the backing cloth.  One of the specialists was Swiss textile historian Mechthild Flury-Lemberg.  She was surprised to find a peculiar stitching pattern in the seam of one long side of the Shroud, where a three-inch wide strip of the same original fabric was sewn onto a larger segment.
The stitching pattern, which she says was the work of a professional, is quite similar to the hem of a cloth found in the tombs of the Jewish fortress of Masada.  The Masada cloth dates to between 40 BC and 73 AD.
This kind of stitch has never been found in Medieval Europe.

---

<snip the BS>

All of that has been demonstrated to be false over and over again. Why are you dredging this utter nonsense up yet again?

Barrie Schwortz was a member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (often abbreviated as STURP) a team of scientists which performed a set of experiments and analyses on the Shroud of Turin during the late 1970s and early 1980s. STURP issued its final report in 1981.

After 18 years as a skeptic, in 1995, when confronted with the evidence that the blood on the shroud was of a tortured man, he became convinced of the authenticity of the Shroud, and became a Christian. 

The Shroud and the jew: Barrie Schwortz at TEDx ViadellaConciliazione
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G4sj8hUVaY

"At the beginning of my work, I was very skeptical about its authenticity. I felt no particular emotion toward Jesus because I was raised as an orthodox jew. The only thing I knew about Jesus was that he was a jew, and this was all. Examining the Shroud, I quickly realized that it was painted ".
After 18 years of study, the full conviction came when "the Blood Chemistry Allen Adler, another jew who was part of the study group, I explained why the red blood remained on the Shroud. The old blood would have to be black or brown, while the blood on the Shroud is a red-crimson. It seemed inexplicable, instead it was the last piece of the puzzle. After nearly 20 years of investigation, it was a shock for me to discover that the piece of cloth was the authentic cloth that had been wrapped the body of Jesus. The conclusions I arrived were based exclusively on scientific observation ".
He has no doubt Schwortz: "Once we came to the scientific conclusion that the cloth was authentic, I have come to understand also the meaning. This is the forensic document of the Passion, and for Christians around the world is the most important relic, precisely because it documents everything you read in the Gospels of what was done to Jesus. I think there are enough evidence to prove that this is the cloth that wrapped the body of Jesus ". The truth about Jesus is the task of faith, he states that "from the point of view of science that cloth wrapped the body of man spoken of in the Gospels".
The study of the Shroud has not only convinced of the authenticity, but it has also changed, evidently, also on a personal level.
"At the beginning of the investigation - said Schwortz -, I knew of God, but it was not very important in my life. I had not thought of God, when the avevo 13 years. I was not very religious, it was almost a requirement for my family. Since then I have moved away from the faith, religion and God, until I reached the 50 years. When in 1995 I came to the conclusion that the Shroud was authentic, I built the site www.shroud.com . I started to collect the material and put it to the public. I began to speak publicly about the Shroud around 1996 ".
This dualism, however, could not continue: "When people started asking me if I was a believer, I could not find the answer. At that point I questioned myself and I realized that God was waiting for me. I was really surprised to see that within me there was a belief in God. Fino a 50 years I had pretty much ignored the faith, and suddenly I found myself face to face with God in my heart. Basically I can say that the Shroud was the catalyst that brought me back to God ". He concluded amused: "How many Jews can say that the Shroud of Turin has led them to faith in God"?

Schwortz runs as well the website:
https://www.shroud.com/

[The Architect Of Fate]

So another wall of text that says nothing

[no one]

otangelo, that Angel Dust you smoke, it's not really from Angels, you know that, right?