Shroud of Turin continues to baffle researchers
| April 6, 2012 | Posted by News under News, Religion, Science |
In “Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural” (The Independent, 20 December 2011), Michael Day reports,
After years of work trying to replicate the colouring on the shroud, a similar image has been created by the scientists.
However, they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.
Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.
Actually, anyone familiar with mediaeval technologies (rush lights and donkey power) would discount such claims immediately. Put another way, if mediaeval technologies could produce the Shroud of Turin, the Middle Ages would have been a vastly different time to live in.
But the Independent’s headliner is a bit misleading: What the Enea report said was, “This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.”
That’s science working as it should. No fatuous claims are dredged up to explain it away. If we don’t know, we don’t know. Maybe some day we will know all.
Incidentally, the Catholic Church does not claim that the Shroud is authentic (because there is no sure way of doing that). Even if it is a remarkable piece of cloth and no one ever determines how the image was created prior to the twentieth century, that does not prove it is the burial cloth of Christ. The Church says only that it is permitted to Catholics to venerate the Shroud if they wish, on account of the fact that no one has shown that it is not authentic, and it may help someone’s spiritual life.
See also: The Shroud of Turin makes way more sense than water on Mars
52 Responses to Shroud of Turin continues to baffle researchers
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m a Christian and doubt the shroud is a legitimate artifact connected to Jesus’ resurrection. No need to invoke the supernatural.
Maybe so, about access to technology, but sunlight has a very significant UV component. It is largely parallel light, and can be easily used to discolor clothing with a cast image as crude as the shroud exhibits. UV lasers are used today for micro-lithography purposes, but this image is crude in comparison. Discoloration can be done with UV masked by possible several ways w/ someone of artistic skill of course – e.g. with crude stained glass, light silk or a simple topical solution (e.g. honeysuckle). In place of intensity one need only use longer exposure times for the same effects. No need for modern “high-intensity ultra violet lasers”. Why spell that out instead of high intensity “UV” lasers? Just asking.
Finally, why does the image on the shroud seem like a portrait, rather than appear as a distorted/stretched face. i.e. an image from a cloth wrapped around a person’s head?
as to:
Yet:
as to:
Yet, In the following video, new findings link the ‘event horizon’ of the Resurrection (as recorded on the Shroud of Turin) and the ‘event horizon’ of the Dawn of Creation (Big Bang)
Further notes;
This following recent video revealed a very surprising holographic image that was found on the Shroud:
If scientists want to find the source for the supernatural light which made the “3D – photographic negative” image I suggest they look to the thousands of documented Near-Death Experiences (NDE’s) in Judeo-Christian cultures. It is in their testimonies that you will find mention of an indescribably bright ‘Light’ or ‘Being of Light’ who is always described as being of a much brighter intensity of light than the people had ever seen before. All people who have been in the presence of ‘The Being of Light’ while having a deep NDE have no doubt whatsoever that the ‘The Being of Light’ they were in the presence of is none other than ‘The Lord God Almighty’ of heaven and earth.
It should be noted: All foreign, non-Judeo-Christian culture, NDE studies I have looked at have a extreme rarity of encounters with ‘The Being Of Light’ and tend to be very unpleasant NDE’s save for the few pleasant children’s NDEs of those cultures that I’ve seen (It seems there is indeed an ‘age of accountability’). The following study was shocking for what was found in some non-Judeo-Christian NDE’s:
Another very interesting point about the Shroud is, since the Shroud had to be extremely close to the body when the image was made, and also considering the lack of any distinctive shadow patterns on the image, it is apparent the only place this supernatural light could have possibly come from, that made the image on the Shroud, was directly from the body itself ! Yes, you read that last sentence right:
God’s crowning achievement for this universe was not when He created this universe. God’s crowning achievement for this universe was when He Himself inhabited the human body He had purposely created the whole universe for, to sanctify human beings unto Himself through the death and resurrection of his “Son” Jesus Christ. This is truly something which should fill anyone who reads this with awe. The wonder of it all is something I can scarcely begin to understand much less write about.
Also of note as to providing a viable ‘mechanism’ for the apparent ‘burst of light’ emanating from the body of Christ:
Verse and Music:
What we have then is a disagreement with the Italian scientists quoted in the above article, that states the researchers ‘managed the effect’ with a high intensity UV laser. ‘Managed the effect’ means they replicated the image, and it was with a UV source. This notion is further re-enforced since the article goes on to argue the technology was not available to the medieval forgers [if that is even the cause/source], not that it was insufficient.
See, I won’t say what the image source really is, I don’t know. I appreciate your views on bio-photons etc… I have some idea’s of a similar nature about other things. But if this was the body of Jesus bursting into light, or something like that, then why any image? Note the discolorations that show eyes and beard in the image. Wouldn’t you rather expect a discolored area looking like a filled in silhouette than a defined image with internal features. And there seems to be contradicting ideas on how the light emitted from the body. In one of the videos an expert of some sort talks about the sheet floating parallel to explain the image above the body and the light then having to emitting I guess perpendicular to the sheets, but in another view I vaguely recall the sheet needed to be very close to the body…which is it? Also, note form a full view of the shroud that the edges are very discolored where it was folded. Why is it discolored on the folded edges?
So, needless to say, I am far from convinced this is the image of Jesus. The shroud has a scattered history, and controversial one.
A wiki sourced reference to John Calvin’s comment is noteworthy here:
lex parsimoniae
jguy you object:
Yet you neglect to take note of a key thing:
Thus the Italian scientists never claimed to have reproduced the Shroud in ‘all its facets’! Thus jguy, your objection is left hanging until you can provide evidence that this particular characteristic mentioned by Moran,,,
,,was reproduced in ‘all its facets’!
jguy, your other objection is not even referenced ,,,
,,, save to some ‘vague recollection”,,, exactly how is this helpful, jguy, since you provide no source for me to refute? Am I suppose to refute what you ‘vaguely recall’? Sorry jguy, I shall not chase shadows of your mind!
further notes:
Here is a interesting video interview with Bruno Barberis, director of the International Center of Sindonology in Turin, Italy, who states that the Shroud is the ‘actual burial cloth of Jesus’;
Moreover, in a fairly recent breakthrough, prior to this ‘laser test’ the carbon dating question has been thoroughly addressed and refuted by Joseph G. Marino and M. Sue Benford in 2000. Their research, with textile experts, showing the carbon testing was done with a piece of the Shroud which was subject to expert medieval reweaving in the 1500’s had much historical, and photographic, evidence behind it. Their historical, and photographic, evidence was then scientifically confirmed by chemical analysis in 2005 by Raymond Rogers. Thus, the fact that a false age was shown by the 1989 carbon testing has been accepted across the board as far as the scientific evidence itself is concerned.
The following is the main peer reviewed paper which has refuted the 1989 Carbon Dating:
Rogers passed away shortly after publishing this paper, but his work was ultimately verified by the Los Alamos National Laboratory:
This following is the Los Alamos National Laboratory report and video which completely confirms the Rogers’ paper:
Music and Verse:
Further note:
excerpt from video description:
As a footnote; Godel, who proved you cannot have a mathematical ‘Theory of Everything’, without allowing God to bring completeness to the ‘Theory of Everything’, also had this to say
——–
A shortened form of the overall pattern of evidence is here:
I concede then that they admit they did not replicate the effect exactly. But not that this somehow necessitates a supernatural explanation.
I really didn’t want to get into a research project on a cloth that has been dragged through centuries of controversy. We don’t even have the original scriptures available in such a fashion.
What strikes me most is how some people seem sure that this IS the image of Jesus burnt(?) into a cloth. A cloth that we do have knowledge of as having a debated/unverifiable origin by scholars [e.g. Calvin] a half a millennium ago or more. So, should we know for certain? Because it is too hard to replicate the effect exactly?
Oh, funny, regarding the shadows of my mind…
Funny that I found the reference was you
I did not think extremely close would be a sheet floating over a body (i.e. and not touching it)…unless one were to imagine a relatively large reference frame. Was the sheet floating or not?
Full circle?:
Regarding the UV explanation. If mere UV couldn’t generate the effect sufficiently, then why would he say this? Doesn’t this imply back that mere UV [albeit intense] would be sufficient?
Also, I’m a little perplexed at why it’s said a UV source today could not generate sufficient intensity to produce the effect. But we can generate UV with enough intensity to vaporize silicon, make holes in printer heads and build plasma screens. I’ve worked on high powered UV laser systems. Surely, we already have the capability to not just discolor linen, but to blast through it. Perhaps, I’m missing something. I hope it’s not an explanation invoking particle physics. :S
jguy, the ‘extremely close’ I noted and wrapped around which you imagined inauthenticates the shroud are two very different points. My point of extreme closeness arises from direct observation of the shroud, and your ‘wrapped around’ arises from your a-priori imagination of how it should have ‘naturally’ occurred. But no one ever claimed Jesus rising from the dead was a ‘natural’ event! In fact it has been repeated referred to as the most momentous miracle to ever happen in human history.
I find your laser intensity point of ‘vaporizing silicon’ to be a bit superfluous, since the laser experiments were conducted in a optics laboratory and clearly they were not just trying to be sensational but were referencing a specific characteristic of intensity that needed to be achieved to accomplished the effect on the cloth they were seeking to attain.,,, As to your other doubts of it being a forgery, well you are welcome to them, but as for myself, a picture is worth a thousand words,,,
Shroud of Turin in 3-D – The Holographic Experience – Face & Body – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5889891/
Shroud Of Turin – Photographic Negative – 3D Hologram – The Lamb – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5664213/
I’m enjoying this conversation immensely. I haven’t been updated on the Shroud since the old days at ARN, when Leonard kept us informed of the latest news.
@bornagain77
My question on the ‘closeness’ was about the literal distance of the shroud to the body [assuming a body]. It was not meant to in-authenticate the shroud, but to raise a question about for any coherent explanation between the various sources [one was you, the other was a video that depicted a floating sheet]. In my view one was not ‘extremely close’. But as I confessed, this is really a matter of reference frame [i.e. it's partially subjective]. The use of ‘extremely close’ that you used above, in it’s context, pertains to this distance…not the distance of observation: ‘since the Shroud had to be extremely close to the body when the image was made’
Rather than get further drawn into such details at this point, let me clarify that I do not see this as a forgery or authentic. I merely surmised a generic approach on how it might be forged. Anyway, I see it more of a controversial historical cloth, that so far, for me, deems no claim of what it actually is. I suppose the scientists are correct to state essentially to each his own view. It may very well be an image of a body or some elaborate forgery with some simple techniques we might be overlooking. Images seem compelling for some reasons. But leave uncertainty that it was the cloth associated with Christ’s resurrection.
I’m not trying to be argumentative. But what specific characteristic of intensity regarding UV light is there than the energy dose rate and/or perhaps spectral range?
It seems like it would be great if we could prove this was the actual burial cloth of Jesus. Maybe though, it wouldn’t be? For example, it would be bad if then people would fixate on the cloth and venerate the image.
I don’t know.
Anyway, still I don’t think we can be sure, and the various re-compilations on how to view the image don’t seem to prove it, though they can be interesting to view.
@bornagain77
OFF TOPIC: Regarding your thoughts & links on NDE’s and how they seem to be reported differently globally. I can’t recall the source(s), but maybe you know something of this claim: That alien abduction claims appear across all demographics – by sex, age, nationality, etc – except one: born-again Christians.
I first read that as a statistic in a book, but I can not recall the title. It was about 7 or 8 years ago. I accept the stat since I am compelled that such encounters (i.e. the fourth+ kind) are demonic – if not simply explained as psychological. Psychological here imply materialistic(e.g. chemical) causes and/or self deluded.
Would you share what you know or think on this statistic and/or topic?
jguy as to:
Sorry for the ambiguity that led to your confusion. I meant ‘extremely close’ as to mean in an order of a few inches as opposed to a few, or several, feet as was once suggested by the camera obscura method proposed to be used by DaVinci. I will correct for that ambiguity to make it clear. Though I’m certainly no expert on the Shroud, in my studies of the Shroud literature, I am impressed by the pattern that has emerged. The Shroud simply refuses to be falsified. Much like the proposed evidence for neo-Darwinism, every evidence proposed against the Shroud, that holds it is a forgery, simply falls apart on scrutiny. Time and again the skeptics are shown to be wrong in their proposals. But perhaps the one thing that has made me side strongly in favor of authenticity is the clarity of the ‘photographic negative-3-D holographic’ image, which wasn’t even entirely discovered until the 1970′s, as was referenced here:
It is beyond incredible for me to believe that some anonymous genius would make a forged image that would take the best of modern science to reveal the secrets of! Especially when madern science cannot replicate the image in ‘all its facets’! The image on the shroud simply cannot be made by hand. The clarity of the image clearly reflects reality and does not reflect forgery. The details noted by forensic pathology are uncannily accurate. Here is a small glimpse of the evidence from that angle:
There is much more evidence available on the web that can be attained with not too much effort at a search. The evidence is simply overwhelming that the shroud reflects reality. Now once one accepts that the evidence supports the fact that the shroud is authentic, then the question becomes, “Well, if it was not forged then how did the image form on the shroud?”. Here once again modern science, as is so often the case with modern science, offers clues as well deepening our wonder. I’ve referenced ‘biophotons’ here,,
http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-423370
,,,which point out that the biophotons, which ‘we are swimming in’ at the molecular level, are described as thus,,,
As well, as to establishing a plausible mechanism, it is noted here that consciousness is integral to reality:
And when consciousness is allowed it ‘proper role’ in reality, we find:
And indeed we find a ‘new event horizon” on the shroud very similar to the Big Bang:
Perhaps you will imagine that a ‘Big Bang’ type even would disintegrate the shroud, yet the common picture that is imagined for the Big Bang is actually not the type of event it was:
jguy, the evidence of how the image could have possibly formed ‘supernaturally’, like a gigantic puzzle, starts to become easier and easier to see once the pieces start falling in place for a person. Amazingly the ‘pattern of evidence includes the reconciliation of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics:
A shortened form of the overall pattern of evidence is here:
overview here:
Verse and Music:
JGuy,
I’m a devout Christian who has for years fervently believed in the crucifixion and divine resurrection of the historical Jesus. Up until a few years ago, I believed that the Shroud of Turin was a fraud based on the 1988 carbon dating testing. I fell into the trap of dismissing it outright and stopped reading and researching as soon as I read that line in any number of newspaper articles.
Then a few years ago I went to an apologetics conference where the Shroud of Turin was being discussed by Gary Haberman. This greatly piqued my interest and I became obsessed and started researching this non-stop.
There is no doubt whatsoever in my mind that this is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus Christ. There is no conceivable explanation of how something like this could have been forged or created by natural processes.
Off the top of my head, experts have determined that it is forensically accurate down to the smallest detail. Even the blood samples have the presence of biluribin, which is a hormone produced in the blood when someone is tortured. Anatomically, it perfectly matches up with the Sudarium of Oviedo, and leading botanists have traced the pollen on the Shroud of plants that only grow in the Jerusalem area in the Spring.
The victim on the Shroud has wounds that perfectly match the injuries inflicted on Jesus as recorded in the gospels (and keep in mind that Jesus was a unique crucifixion). The vast majority of crucified people did not experience all the things that Jesus experienced in the gospels.
Furthermore, the image (created by the resurrection event) is on top of the blood stains, and even the the Italian chemist who was paid by the atheist organization to duplicate the Shroud of Turin was confounded by this detail. Then there is the rather unusual fact that the Shroud contains 3 dimensional information and the image shows up in the photographic negative.
I’d be interested in hearing your explanation of the Shroud. If it is not a forgery, then what is it? And how did this occur naturalistically?
Finally, it is worth noting that non-Christian scientists who have studied the Shroud have come to the conclusion that it is authentic, and many of them have converted to Christianity as a result of their research.
jguy as to
Indeed, contrary to what is popularly believed, I have found that NDE’s of foreign cultures are very different from the extremely pleasant NDE’s commonly reported in Judeo-Christian cultures. I’ve referenced this following study before:
But also, I have these following studies that reveal a stark contrast between foreign NDE’s and Judeo-Christian NDE’s:
As well, I found that the rare exceptions, besides the children, of a positive NDE in foreign cultures, that were often touted as proof that foreign cultures have the same type of extremely pleasant NDE’s as Judeo-Christian cultures have, were most often had by people who had grown up in a Judeo-Christian culture and then moved to the foreign culture. ,,,
Here is a overview of the typical Judeo-Christian NDE:
Verse and Music:
jguy as to ‘alien abduction’, well I’m not, and never have been, big on any of that. Though my belief that they were ‘demonic’ was tempered by a passage of scripture that is uncannily ‘UFO-like’:
Yet despite this passage of scripture, my view of ‘Alien Abductions’ has basically remained the same as yours, but not so much ‘demonic, but that the vast majority of them are of a ‘paranoid/delusional’ nature, Much like the type of Alien Abduction reflected in this song:
Just perusing some online stuff. Has anyone here considered this explanation for the image?
http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n74part2.pdf
Excerpt:
BTW: A question on the 3D images found in some online videos about the shroud. What is it about the 3D imaging that some seem to find remarkable? Yes, the effect is cool, but I don’t think it is one that requires intelligent coding of the image. Moreso, it seems to requires intelligent manipulation of the image. I imagine it is possible to produce such 3D imagery with almost any image where shading indicates at depth.
Jguy, you mention a paper that was coauthored by the late Raymond Rogers. Perhaps you should look more closely at Rogers subsequent work on the Shroud after that paper:
Indeed jguy, it seems that Rogers had a complete change of heart towards what he called ‘the lunatic fringe’, after that paper you cited, as this following video makes clear:
The following is the main peer reviewed paper, by Rogers, which has refuted the 1989 Carbon Dating:
Rogers passed away shortly after publishing this paper, but his work was ultimately verified by the Los Alamos National Laboratory:
This following is the Los Alamos National Laboratory report and video which completely confirms the Rogers’ paper:
Jguy, as to your dismissal of the significance, and uniqueness, of the 3-D nature of the image, and trying to come up with some ‘natural way to make the 3-D image (though you don’t mention a method, you just hold to the belief that there may be a method) all I can say is that I went the complete opposite way as you are going and tried to understand the 3-D image on the 2-Dimensional surface of the linen from the ‘spiritual’ angle:
semi OT:
It’s not a baseless belief. It’s actually fairly to understand how this would work.
If it is possible to measure gradients in images, it is possible to assign meaning to the gradients [such as changes in depth]. If we know the nature of the structure of what the image is of [in this case a human body], we can relate gradient regions to each other using only a handful of reasonable assumptions. Examples:
- Regarding the face: the image peak is obviously enough the tip of the nose.
- Cheeks gradients toward the outside take us further into the depth field.
- Eye gradients are deeper than the peak of the cheeks.
- etc..
And this works into a simple 3D image. The ability to rotate is a simple enough with any 3D software like 3D-Max, Lightwave, etc.. The new 3D image will have a limited rotational range, and this is because the depth is only derived a single side view. This is why the 3D image that seems to get raves here is only shown to rotate a few degree’s in the video.
Again. Let me re-iterate that I hold no position on the authenticity of the cloth. I simple choose to squelch any conclusions based on things that appear uniquely extraordinary, but actually can have simple explanations.
Well jguy, you keep saying the ‘photographic negative-3-D hologram image ‘can’ have a simple explanation yet you never produce a simple explanation. (amazingly I’ve been through exactly this same type of argumentation many times before with neo-Darwinists!) In fact it seems you are trying to say that the Shroud is not really all that special and that any ole photograph or painting can produce such a 3-D hologram in such a way as the Shroud has. Yet you have offered no such comparable examples of a photograph or painting producing 3-D holographic information such as the shroud:
So once again I beg to differ from you on your seeming gross lack of appreciation for what you are actually dealing with, and with your simplistic ‘rationalizations’ that have no merit to the evidence at hand. ,,, Here is the paper on how the hologram was derived for the Shroud from the ’3-D’ information’ on the shroud if you care to actually look at the 3-D hologram evidence instead of just dismissing it with whatever convenient excuse you can find.
This is perhaps the most ‘unexpected’ result to came from the hologram:
BA77,
I have to admit, there does seem to be a bit of that perverse denial of extraordinary evidence that we typically see from the Darwinists. I’m starting to wonder if JGuy really is a Christian or simply some atheist masquerading as a Christian in an attempt to gain credibility in being skeptical about the Shroud.
(And note that I am NOT saying that all Christians have to believe that the Shroud is authentic. But I think that most people who do not think it is authentic are either a) simply ignorant of the overwhelming evidence for it, or b) hyper skeptical about anything that they cannot personally see and touch, or c) biased against the Shroud because of their worldview, these people WANT the Shroud to be a fraud or at least no big deal. This is clearly the bias I am reading in JGuy’s messages).
I find it puzzling how an informed person like JGuy can just sweep all the evidence aside (the pollen evidence, the forensic evidence, the blood patterns, etc) as no big deal and then claim that any old process can create a 3D holographic image in photo-negative without spelling out how that works. The simplest way to claim that any old process can do this is to produce another artifact that has these same sorts of properties, and to date I’m not aware of any other object that has those special properties.
Even if those properties were not there, all the other evidence (the bilirubin in the blood, the pollen from Jerusalem area plants, the exact matching of the forensic evidence with the narrative from the gospels, the anatomical match with the Sudarium of Oviedo) would give us a compelling artifact that validated the crucifixion narrative in the gospels.
wgbutler, it does make you wonder of motives. ,,, As well wgbutler you may be interested in this Shroud Documentary, that I recently found, and that was recently uploaded to youtube, which is a overview of the evidence on the Shroud before the carbon dating was overturned. Though a bit dated, and not particularly comprehensive, I still thought the documentary was very well done:
Funny. Other than finding it amazing, I actually felt the same about your fervent argumentation. Because nothing presented [yet], that I have read, has any real objective substance that leads me to conclude, “Whoa, that must be supernatural!” — And this is a case where one must not assume it true to interpret the data.
About the 3D video. I’ve seen that video before. I don’t find it amazing that the image lifts off better or worse than the photo and sketch. However, because the depth is better defined. It seems less likely that it was the result of an artistic forger, but rather does represent the image a real body, where distance from the cloth was the cause of varying levels of discoloration.
By the way, the method they used is nearly as I described. Except for the assumptions I proposed to associate the relative depth regions. If assumptions were not used in the rendering, this is why I would tend to believe it was an actual body image. But that would still be far from a conclusion that it is the burial cloth of Jesus.
Excerpt:
Regarding the two observations:
This is true for almost any art where a contained image is composed of degree’s of shading. i.e. Up close I can expect no identifiable features. But further away, the entire structure in the image will seem to just appear. If this image was formed the way one man supposed many years ago by amines reacting with substances on the cloth [hypothetically :. notwithstanding that he retracted later]. I suspect the discoloration would have a better chance than the DaVinci sketch to indicate depth.
That is just a subjective observations. This is the kind of stuff that reminds me of the type of Darwinist argumentation, such as the same number of digits on human hands and chimps as evidence of common descent. What does it exactly prove? At least with the Darwinist’s argument, we probably at least agree the cause must be common. Anyway, the image may very well appear to have depth, but so does red shapes appear to stand out against blue shapes. And perhaps the art I described above may have the same effect if laid out on a table. I don’t have such art near me, neither do I have the shroud to look at for myself either. Even so… what conclusions could I reasonably derive from that if I made the same observation on my perception of an images depth? That it must be supernatural?! :/
At best, I will give more credence that this is likier the result of an actual body.
About the “LAMB” evidence. I could not see what they were seeing in the video. Nothing struck me as a symbol. i saw blobs of shading at best. If you know of any better visuals that distinguish any Hebrew characters in the shroud, please post a link.
well jguy, like I said before, you are welcome to all your doubts, but as for myself, a picture is worth a thousand words:
jguy, I also find it funny that the one piece of evidence you actually did submit (the paper by Rogers) was so embarrassing for you since Rogers was the one who overturned the Carbon Dating. ,,, Moreover just a little research on your part would have saved you this embarrassment. Thus why did you jump so quickly to put it forth? There again comes the question of your motives. You simply have not put forth the honest effort that would be indicative of someone who was truly open to the possibility that the Shroud may be real and seeking for the truth, but instead you have actions that are indicative of someone who is less than forthright!. And from your subsequent responses, after your embarrasment with Rogers, I see you are even more inclined to try to raise doubts than to ever honestly investigate the evidence. Because of such consistent action on your part, this scripture comes readily to mind;
Luke 11:23
“He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.
As to your request for a photograph with the letters on it. A little search would have given you this:
http://cdn-3-service.phanfare......d04fac37_1
Here is another readily accessible site that you should have easily found yourself if you were honestly seeking instead of just being defensively argumentative:
The Shroud of Turin in 3-D
http://shroud3d.com/
FINDINGS IN THE THREE DIMENSIONAL MATERIALS
http://shroud3d.com/findings/f.....-materials
BA77,
I’m 99.9% certain that JGuy is just another internet atheist masquerading as a Christian trying to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of believers. If I had any doubt that he wasn’t this type of person, the whole “common cause” remark about Chimpanzees and humans pretty much outed him.
Athiests love to do this, especially around major Christian holidays. It’s amazing how 2,000 years after the advent of Christianity we still see non-believers masquerading as Christians (as they did in the times of Paul the Apostle) attacking the faith. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
I have to confess curiosity as to why the atheists are so fixated on the Shroud of Turin. An atheist group paid Italian chemist Garlashelli to create a fake replica in an attempt to discredit the Shroud just a few years ago. This is clearly something that is on their minds. The problem for them is, even if they are successful in convincing a bunch of people that the Shroud is a fake or that it has nothing to do with the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus, the fact still remains that Jesus died and was crucified, and they will have to stand before Him in the Great Judgement and give an account of all of their deeds.
BTW, here is a link which discusses the evidence by Hebrew University botanist Avinoam Danin which found that the Shroud contains pollen from plants that only grow in the Jerusalem area and blossom in the Passover season. He also found pollen from the plant that was used to make the crown of thorns. This is pretty remarkable stuff.
You guys should find these video clips interesting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related
Sorry. One of those Youtube links I must have got from one of bornagain77′s posts above.
wgbutler and Axel, I just uploaded this:
Please note that both the front and back of the Body present fairly undistorted views. As well, please note how the back and buttocks of the Body are not flattened as would be expected if the Body had been laying flat on a stone slab. As well, please note the fairly undistorted high quality view of the Body. This fairly undistorted, anatomically correct, high quality view is not to be expected if the shroud had been wrapped around the body. Thus this is what gives us reason to believe that 1. The Shroud had to be flat on both sides of the Body when the image was made. And 2. Light was emitted from The Body when the image was made. And 3. The Body was ‘defying’ gravity when the image was made.
Embarrassing? Really? I have not even discussed radiocarbon dating in this thread. The topic I was submitting was about chemical reactions on the cloth.
jguy, and all you have to do is prove that a diffusing gas emitting from a corpse can produce a fairly concise 3-D photographic negative hologram on a linen clothe. Good luck with that since one problem is that distortion will be introduced once you wrap the shroud around the face to try to prevent to much distortion from the diffusing gas.
Here are some other techniques you might want to check out if that one doesn’t cut it for you (which it won’t):
Yet jguy, these all fail for one reason or another. But, You are welcome to try! Brilliant men have literally racked their brains trying to figure it out. The Shroud is literally the most studied artifact by science. Here is a sample of the papers and studies published thus far:
And after all this research, scientists, and the public at large, are STILL absolutely confounded as to how the Shroud image formed! This should give you a big hint jguy!!!
It all comes down to this jguy;
Verse and Music:
Jguy, let’s just for the sake of argument hold that the Shroud is authentic, and that it bears witness of the most momentous, miraculous, event to ever occur on the face of earth, indeed that it bears witness to the most momentous, miraculous, event to ever occur in this universe. The defeating of death itself by incarnate God. Our Lord Jesus Christ! If this audacious claim is so then we should witness certain characteristics on the Shroud. One thing we should witness is we should see gravity being defied. You may ask, ‘why should we see gravity being defied?’. The reason why is that entropy, the primary reason why things grow old and die in this universe, in inextricably bound up with the 4-D space-time of gravity:
And as was also noted in post 32 we find gravity being ‘defied’ in the evidence gleaned from the Shroud:
As well as is noted here:
Moreover a event horizon is something else we would ‘naturally expect’ to see if this 4-D space-time of death and decay was truly overcome by Christ, and this is also inexplicably found in the evidence gleaned from the Shroud
Moreover, to add a little more icing on the cake, the number one problem in physics today is a reconciliation of Quantum Mechanics and the 4-D space-time of General Relativity into a ‘theory of everything’:
Yet Godel showed that you can’t have a ‘complete’ ‘theory of everything’ without God:
Yet if we allow consciousness its ‘proper’ role in Quantum Mechanics,,,
,,,and if we allow that Christ was God incarnate who actually did defeat the death inherent in the entropic space-time of General Relativity,,,
,,,then we find a compelling reconciliation between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics within the resurrection event as testified to by the Shroud that agrees with Godel’s incompleteness theorem!
further notes:
Verse and Music:
bornagain. My approach to this thread was with no background on having read any papers on the shroud. Though I was familiar with it about as much as one is familiar with an acquainted person. So, no significant time or effort invested in this to be embarrassed. Posted comments were geared, from the start, at conclusions on the shroud based on what seemed like facets that could be possible by some other natural process or forgery – since forgers have existed throughout time with various motivations. I posted at least one link to a possible method sans UV light, and I was hoping from the context of when and how I posted it, that anyone reading [you or others] could see that I was probing and not making positive assertions… here was the preface to that link above:
So, don’t take me as close minded on this. If anything, my approach should be helpful – at least to me – as I am asking questions, throwing out potential rebuttals and dismissing claims that are not so fantastic. If the conclusion of the shroud is valid, then those making the conclusions should not come off as hostile or demeaning towards attempts at critical suppositions or questions.
I would rather be dismissive of subjective reasoning and those that may not actually be as fantastic as suggested. Emotionalism goes nowhere fast, I hope you agree… For example, but not that you held these positions:
-the technique(s) to render a 3D image are not fantastic exclusive evidence.
-that an image can be rendered into a 3D image is not fantastic evidence.
-making an 2D image that can be rendered to 3D does not yet seem fantastic either.
However, I concede that to produce an image that can be readily rendered with such a process would be difficult to produce, and admittedly I can not identify or conceive of a process..yet. Though it does not lead to a conclusion of any sort yet, the field seems to be narrowed. Being particularly difficult to make or at least difficult to conceive is the reason I would be more biased against the shroud as forgery. In retrospect, as you were indicating, I agree the amine approach would lead to a blurred image. And if the shroud was wrapped around the body it would probably lose most of the gradients to indicate depth.
I’ll think about it some more, and propose some ideas.
BTW: I could have googled [errr...searched!] for the “LAMB” info. One of the reasons I asked you for a link was because you have obviously put more time and effort into this. I’d rather bypass amateurish websites, and see where you find the evidence most compelling..to start. Thanks for the link, I will check it out.
bornagain.
BTW: I mentioned before, but would like to see what you can add…
Just to consider what you mentioned before about bio-photons. Start with this assumption & evidence set on the shape of the image:
1.ASSUMPTIONS:
– A.No extra rules were applied during the 3D rendering process than allowing shade density to indicate view depth.
1.SHROUD IMAGE SHAPE.
– A.The image shows gradients that correlate well with expected the view depth.
– B.The shape of the image does not appear distorted as would be the case with
Questions…
Assuming bio-photons emitting from any organic matter, and int he case of assuming this was Jesus body and the release of photons was unprecedented. If the image on the cloth was formed by bio-photons(hereafter: “bp”), what must be true? I will pose some thoughts…
For the image to carry observed detail, it seems that the source of bp must be either:
a. In contact with the cloth (or extremely close as in a few millimeters).
b. The cloth is parallel to the body, and bp are traveling parallel paths from the source.
c. The medium between the body and cloth have a in it the property of a lense.
d. Some combination of the above.
Objections to these bp scenarios:
scenario a. The image [esp. face] shape would be distorted by being stretched out, and depth would be nearly homogenized and thus not congruent with the face observed in evidence 1.A and 1.B.
scenario b. Image would be faithful to the evidence 1.B, but there seems to be no reason that depth would be indicated with varying densities of bp. i.e. Why/how would bp densities change?
scenario c. This has the same problem as scenario b., but is a more complicated speculative mechanism. Occams rasor seems favorable.
scenario d.???
From this, I think the thing that needs to be addressed is why would bp densities change across the image. Any ideas on how this would occur? One problem seems to be that bp would not coincidentally emit more from a part of the body close to the cloth versus one further way…assuming bp are traveling parallel paths, the densities would not change from the source to the cloth. This would give a detailed silhouette but lack any gradients to indicate depth.
Thoughts?
bornagain. bold are amendments to prior post:
“1. EVIDENCES on SHROUD IMAGE SHAPE.
– A.The image shows gradients that correlate well with expected the view depth.
– B.The shape of the image does not appear distorted as would be the case with the amine diffusion scenario.“
Jguy, I like the reasoning of b. c. and d., As to a ‘contributing’ source for light on top of ‘biophoton laser light’, and granting for the sake of argument that the shroud is authentic, i.e. granting for the sake of argument that Christ was God incarnate in human flesh and granting that death was defeated by God in the resurrection event as witnessed to by the shroud, I submit this additional ‘source of light’ to resolve the some issues of distortion that you mentioned may occur with ‘natural’ biophotons (bps): I suggest we look to the thousands of documented Near-Death Experiences (NDE’s) in Judeo-Christian cultures. It is in their testimonies that we find mention of an indescribably bright ‘Light’ or ‘Being of Light’ who is always described as emitting a much brighter intensity of light than the people had ever seen before. All people who have been in the presence of ‘The Being of Light’ while having a deep NDE have no doubt whatsoever that the ‘The Being of Light’ they were in the presence of is none other than ‘The Lord God Almighty’ of heaven and earth.
As to the establishing the credibility of NDE’s, here is a short overview of the evidence;
and as to establishing another contributing factor that may help explain the lack of distortion witnessed on the shroud, as well as establishing the physical reality of the tunnels described in NDE’s, please note the distortion of 4-D space-time, noted at the 3:22 minute mark of the following video, when this 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape around the direction of travel as a ‘hypothetical’ observer moves towards the ‘higher dimension’ of the speed of light, with the ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ reported in very many Near Death Experiences: (Of note: This following video was made by two Australian University Physics Professors with a supercomputer.)
Music and verse
Having read extensively on the Shroud since the mid ’70s, and especially the original scientific investigations, I have found no supportable evidence that it is a forgery. Rather, all original evidence I have seen points to an authentic artifact that shows evidence of events like those described in the gospels. See:
See Shroud.com
Furthermore, no hypotheses of human formation have held up. The 3D image formed by the density concentration of fibers colored on the outer surface has been discovered but cannot be reproduced. Natural but invisible plasma flows were also found with UV signatures.
See also books on the Shroud of Turin.
You were reading on the shroud? Were you having a snack on the shroud too? How did you get access to it? (kidding DLH)
Just this past weekend, of all weekends (no idea why they picked it), the History Channel had a few shows about the Shroud. They can most likely be viewed on-line.
bornagain, from what you say about it, I think the vimeo video you linked must be very similar to the one of the female particle-physicist and artist. Must watch it, anyway.
I had a nasty turn a bit earlier, watching a video in which they brought out the light and shade of the photographic positive a bit better, but then they morphed Christ’s face from the mature, ultra noble and dignified face of the heroically-crucified God/man, into the face of a callow, young, Hollywood film-star type, with very curly, blow-dried (or permed?) hair!
The centrality of each observer also predicates a personal God, does it not, bornagain?
Part of the strange, LOGICALLY BINDING mosaic of indications and prompts thereof.
Axel, as to
I certainly find it to be so. Whether one chooses to answer the ‘knock at the door’ is another matter. But the mechanism, as far as what the best of science can tell us, is certainly in place for each of us to have a personal relationship with God.,,, Even as ‘bull in a china shop’ indelicate humans can be to such gentle and ‘whispered’ loving guidance.
Music:
OT: Here is a very recently uploaded Dr. Craig debate from his UK tour;
I hate to be late posting here, but jguy you are incorrect. What ray Rogers proposed was called the maillard reaction and it was based on a theory which was flimsy at best. It was t just the fact that there was 3d information on the shroud, but that it was spatial 3d information which dissipated when the body was more than 10 centimeters (or 2 inches) away from the shroud. In other words the shroud image wasn’t formed by body to shroud contact.
Another problem with the maillard reaction is it can’t explain why there are no side images on the back or frnot of the shroud. If there was a maillard reaction there should be image formation on both sides of the body image.
The maillard reaction also doesn’t take into account the xray qualities that are on the hands, wrist, jaw, parts of the head and the femur.
The maillard reaction wasn’t ray Rogers at his scientific best . Ray Rogers was an agnostic that wouldn’t allow himself to believe in the supernatural and the maillard reaction was a desperate attempt by Rogers to try to come up with a natural, materialistic explanation of the image of the shroud.
If you want to see Rogers at his best read his peer reviewed research that was published in thermochimica acta invalidating the c14 tests that were done in 1988 on the shroud .
There has never been a naturalistic explanation of how that image got on the shroud. And no, it’s nothing like a portrait whatsoever.
It’s the only 2d image on earth with 3d spatial information encoded into it.
Forensic science has determined that this image was made from a real body. The most reasonable explanation is that the image is of our Lord and it was caused as Jesus went through the resurrection process.
The power of the Big Lie resides in the power of most secretive and powerful worldlings who, effectively, run the World.
Similarly, the power of the obfuscation of the Big Truth resides with the same people, and for the same reason. Who owns the media and their opulent peers states what ‘goes’ and what doesn’t.
But courts love small items of hard evidence that are irrefutable. And honest men are murdered for possessing them.
How hilarious then that this event-horizon that occurred to the Shroud, should have been empirically established beyond all peradventure, and be absolutely irrefutable by any insensately furious, atheist scientist!
‘Even as ‘bull in a china shop’ indelicate humans can be to such gentle and ‘whispered’ loving guidance.’
Tee hee. I was talking about God’s personal, physical relationship with each of us, bornagain. Like it or lump it, atheists!
Surely, the Shroud only continuous to baffle researchers in the sense that event an horizon in the proximity of a Black Hole baffles them.
However, in both cases, nothing less than an event horizon has been empirically established in relation the Shroud. And what’s more, at least, two miracles apparently took place:
1. The photographic negative, long before photography had been invented;
2. The body of the man defied gravity.
An important thing to note in the Body of Christ defying gravity as testified to by the Shroud in the resurrection event, is that entropy, the primary (only?) reason why things grow and die in this universe is now shown to be inextricably bound together with gravity.,,,
Further notes:
Also of interest is the following
The empirical findings relating to the imprint on the Holy Shroud make this, and a video on YouTube I saw some months ago, rather redundent.
The YouTube video is unequivocal about the fraud, citing chapter and verse re the British Museum man’s duplicity, as I recall. Nevertheless, it is interesting article:
http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.....one-18725/