Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

An Open Letter to Journalists (About the Shroud of Turin and the failures in reporting facts)
Shroud Story ^ | Daniel R. Porter (Freeper Shroudie)

Posted on 08/09/2008 1:52:58 AM PDT by Swordmaker

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last

1 posted on 08/09/2008 1:52:58 AM PDT by Swordmaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: silverleaf

ping to read later

No comments about the concept that the blood of Christ might not have the properties of “normal” blood or any other previously studied chemical substance


2 posted on 08/09/2008 2:01:03 AM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; albee; AnalogReigns; AnAmericanMother; Angelas; AniGrrl; annyokie; Aquinasfan; ...
This is an excellent open letter from Daniel R. Porter (shroudie to us fellow Freepers) to Journalists on the poor quality of reporting they are doing on the topic of the Shroud of Turin. In it, shroudie, provides some very good recaps of the current science and scholarship on the Shroud of Turin. It's long, but well worth the read.

It is a PDF published on shroudie's excellent website:

Shroudstory.com.

I also highly recommend Shroudie's other websites on the Shroud of Turin:

ShroudForum.com.

ShroudofTurin4Journalists.com.

They are excellent resources for up-to-date Shroud information. Tell your friends about them!

If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.


3 posted on 08/09/2008 2:01:52 AM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
It's always interesting how journalists keep referring to something called ‘consensus among scientific community’ .
4 posted on 08/09/2008 2:40:12 AM PDT by paudio (Like it or not, 'conservatism' is a word with many meanings. Yours may be different from mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

God was against making images and He made an Image?


5 posted on 08/09/2008 3:23:59 AM PDT by Soliton (> 100)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
The shroud has nothing to do with my faith. My faith has nothing to do with the shroud. It is a happy coincidence.


6 posted on 08/09/2008 4:46:33 AM PDT by NYer ("Ignorance of scripture is ignorance of Christ." - St. Jerome)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Its real - the media better get used to it.


7 posted on 08/09/2008 5:13:40 AM PDT by ZULU (Non nobis, non nobis Domine, sed nomini tuo da gloriam. God, guts and guns made America great.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
God was against making images and He made an Image?

Leviticus 26:1 You shall not make for yourselves idols, nor shall you set up for yourselves an image or a sacred pillar, nor shall you place a figured stone in your land to bow down to it; for I am the LORD your God.

God forbade us from making images which we would substitute for the image of Him.

Quite a different thing of leaving an image *of* Himself as a testimony and historical placemarker.

...as evidenced by the fact that Christians don't worship the image itself, or sacrifice to it; but correctly use it to direct their attention to Christ.

Cheers!

8 posted on 08/09/2008 6:29:13 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker
Bookmarked for references, thanks.
9 posted on 08/09/2008 6:30:00 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
Here's a novel idea for you.

The article as posted contains the names of the peer-review journals, and the complete citations, of the peer-review scientific journals which refute the most common skeptical claims regarding the Shroud (carbon dating and paint).

Again, these are peer-reviewed journals.

Why don't you go and read the peer-reviewed literature and see what it says?

It's what you'd recommend as a course of action on any other topic.

Cheers!

10 posted on 08/09/2008 6:33:33 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
God was against making images and He made an Image?

The admonition was against making and Worshiping images as gods.

He ordered the creation of the bronze serpent in the desert, but only had it destroyed after is Israelites began to worship it.

He ordered the creation of the images of the Angels on the Ark of the covenant.

11 posted on 08/09/2008 6:56:05 AM PDT by verga (I am not an apologist, I just play one on Television)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·

 
Gods
Graves
Glyphs
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
 

· Google · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology magazine · Biblical Archaeology Society ·
· Mirabilis · Texas AM Anthropology News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo ·
· History or Science & Nature Podcasts · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·


12 posted on 08/09/2008 7:05:00 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/_______Profile hasn't been updated since Friday, May 30, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

read later


13 posted on 08/09/2008 7:54:51 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

thanks...


14 posted on 08/09/2008 8:00:31 AM PDT by fabian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: verga
The admonition was against making and Worshiping images as gods.

If you want to interpret it that way, you'll have to say that the second amendment is about guns for militias too.

15 posted on 08/09/2008 8:27:04 AM PDT by Soliton (> 100)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Turin Shroud confirmed as a fake

by Richard Ingham

PARIS, June 21 (AFP) - A French magazine said on Tuesday it had carried out experiments that proved the Shroud of Turin, believed by some Christians to be their religion’s holiest relic, was a fake.

“A mediaeval technique helped us to make a Shroud,” Science & Vie (Science and Life) said in its July issue. The Shroud is claimed by its defenders to be the cloth in which the body of
Jesus Christ was wrapped after his crucifixion.

It bears the faint image of a blood-covered man with holes in his hand and wounds in his body and head, the apparent result of being crucified, stabbed by a Roman spear and forced to wear a crown of thorns.

In 1988, scientists carried out carbon-14 dating of the delicate linen cloth and concluded that the material was made some time between 1260 and 1390. Their study prompted the then archbishop of Turin, where the Shroud is stored, to admit that the garment was a hoax. But the debate sharply revived in January this year.

Drawing on a method previously used by skeptics to attack authenticity claims about the Shroud, Science & Vie got an artist to do a bas-relief — a sculpture that stands out from the surrounding background — of a Christ-like face.

A scientist then laid out a damp linen sheet over the bas-relief and let it dry, so that the thin cloth was moulded onto the face. Using cotton wool, he then carefully dabbed ferric oxide, mixed with gelatine, onto the cloth to make blood-like marks. When the cloth was turned inside-out, the reversed marks resulted in the famous image of the crucified Christ.

Gelatine, an animal by-product rich in collagen, was frequently used by Middle Age painters as a fixative to bind pigments to canvas or wood.

The imprinted image turned out to be wash-resistant, impervious to temperatures of 250 C (482 F) and was undamaged by exposure to a range of harsh chemicals, including bisulphite which, without the help of the gelatine, would normally have degraded ferric oxide to the compound ferrous oxide.

The experiments, said Science & Vie, answer several claims made by the pro-Shroud camp, which says the marks could not have been painted onto the cloth.

For one thing, the Shroud’s defenders argue, photographic negatives and scanners show that the image could only have derived from a three-dimensional object, given the width of the face, the prominent cheekbones and nose.

In addition, they say, there are no signs of any brushmarks. And, they argue, no pigments could have endured centuries of exposure to heat, light and smoke.

For Jacques di Costanzo, of Marseille University Hospital, southern France, who carried out the experiments, the mediaeval forger must have also used a bas-relief, a sculpture or cadaver to get the 3-D imprint.

The faker used a cloth rather than a brush to make the marks, and used gelatine to keep the rusty blood-like images permanently fixed and bright for selling in the booming market for religious relics.

To test his hypothesis, di Costanzo used ferric oxide, but no gelatine, to make other imprints, but the marks all disappeared when the cloth was washed or exposed to the test chemicals.

He also daubed the bas-relief with an ammoniac compound designed to represent human sweat and also with cream of aloe, a plant that was used as an embalming aid by Jews at the time of Christ.

He then placed the cloth over it for 36 hours — the approximate time that Christ was buried before rising again — but this time, there was not a single mark on it.

“It’s obviously easier to make a fake shroud than a real one,” Science & Vie report drily.

The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.


16 posted on 08/09/2008 8:46:34 AM PDT by Soliton (> 100)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Turin Shroud confirmed as a fake

by Richard Ingham

PARIS, June 21 (AFP) - A French magazine said on Tuesday it had carried out experiments that proved the Shroud of Turin, believed by some Christians to be their religion’s holiest relic, was a fake.

“A mediaeval technique helped us to make a Shroud,” Science & Vie (Science and Life) said in its July issue. The Shroud is claimed by its defenders to be the cloth in which the body of Jesus Christ was wrapped after his crucifixion.

It bears the faint image of a blood-covered man with holes in his hand and wounds in his body and head, the apparent result of being crucified, stabbed by a Roman spear and forced to wear a crown of thorns.

In 1988, scientists carried out carbon-14 dating of the delicate linen cloth and concluded that the material was made some time between 1260 and 1390. Their study prompted the then archbishop of Turin, where the Shroud is stored, to admit that the garment was a hoax. But the debate sharply revived in January this year.

Drawing on a method previously used by skeptics to attack authenticity claims about the Shroud, Science & Vie got an artist to do a bas-relief — a sculpture that stands out from the surrounding background — of a Christ-like face.

A scientist then laid out a damp linen sheet over the bas-relief and let it dry, so that the thin cloth was moulded onto the face. Using cotton wool, he then carefully dabbed ferric oxide, mixed with gelatine, onto the cloth to make blood-like marks. When the cloth was turned inside-out, the reversed marks resulted in the famous image of the crucified Christ.

Gelatine, an animal by-product rich in collagen, was frequently used by Middle Age painters as a fixative to bind pigments to canvas or wood.

The imprinted image turned out to be wash-resistant, impervious to temperatures of 250 C (482 F) and was undamaged by exposure to a range of harsh chemicals, including bisulphite which, without the help of the gelatine, would normally have degraded ferric oxide to the compound ferrous oxide.

The experiments, said Science & Vie, answer several claims made by the pro-Shroud camp, which says the marks could not have been painted onto the cloth.

For one thing, the Shroud’s defenders argue, photographic negatives and scanners show that the image could only have derived from a three-dimensional object, given the width of the face, the prominent cheekbones and nose.

In addition, they say, there are no signs of any brushmarks. And, they argue, no pigments could have endured centuries of exposure to heat, light and smoke.

For Jacques di Costanzo, of Marseille University Hospital, southern France, who carried out the experiments, the mediaeval forger must have also used a bas-relief, a sculpture or cadaver to get the 3-D imprint.

The faker used a cloth rather than a brush to make the marks, and used gelatine to keep the rusty blood-like images permanently fixed and bright for selling in the booming market for religious relics.

To test his hypothesis, di Costanzo used ferric oxide, but no gelatine, to make other imprints, but the marks all disappeared when the cloth was washed or exposed to the test chemicals.

He also daubed the bas-relief with an ammoniac compound designed to represent human sweat and also with cream of aloe, a plant that was used as an embalming aid by Jews at the time of Christ.

He then placed the cloth over it for 36 hours — the approximate time that Christ was buried before rising again — but this time, there was not a single mark on it.

“It’s obviously easier to make a fake shroud than a real one,” Science & Vie report drily.

The first documented evidence of the Shroud dates back to 1357, when it surfaced at a church at Lirey, near the eastern French town of Troyes. In 1390, Pope Clement VII declared that it was not the true shroud but could be used as a representation of it, provided the faithful be told that it was not genuine.


17 posted on 08/09/2008 8:54:30 AM PDT by Soliton (> 100)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Soliton
The admonition was against making and Worshiping images as gods. If you want to interpret it that way, you'll have to say that the second amendment is about guns for militias too.

Why would I have to do that since neither has anything to do with the other, and I am smart enough to see through your false dichotomy?

18 posted on 08/09/2008 9:30:55 AM PDT by verga (I am not an apologist, I just play one on Television)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NYer

The shroud has nothing to do with my faith. My faith has nothing to do with the shroud. It is a happy coincidence.

My sentiments, exactly!


19 posted on 08/09/2008 9:42:46 AM PDT by mckenzie7 (Lib NO MORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: verga
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

"You shall not make for yourself a graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them or serve them; for I The Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate Me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love Me and keep My Commandments." (Exodus 20:4-6 RSV)

They are both seconds. They are both binary statements separated by punctuation.

The first commandment already covers worshiping other gods

20 posted on 08/09/2008 9:51:21 AM PDT by Soliton (> 100)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-119 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson