Posted on 06/08/2011 6:02:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
The Shroud of Turin was made by medieval artist Giotto, it was claimed yesterday.
The 14ft length of fabric, said to be the burial cloth of Christ, bears a faint image of a man and appears to be stained by blood.
However carbon-dating tests have suggested it was produced between 1260 and 1390.
Now Italian art expert Luciano Buso has suggested that the original cloth deteriorated and Giotto was asked to make a copy.
After months of careful examination of photographs of the Shroud - the relic is kept locked away and not available to be viewed unless on special occasions - Luciano Buso has come up with an idea worthy of a Da Vinci Code thriller.
He says that several veiled appearances of the number 15, hidden in the fabric by the artist, indicate Giotto created the Shroud in 1315 - and that it is a copy of the original which had been damaged and was then lost over the centuries. Giotto was perhaps the best known artist of his time and was made famous for his decoration of the Scrovegni Chapel in Padua, the fresco that depicts the life of the Virgin Mary and Christ. Mr Buso insists that 700 years ago it was common practice for artists to insert partial dates into their works so as to guarantee their authenticity and it was known only to a handful of people so as to avoid forgeries. His claims, which form part of a new book he has written, would coincide with 1980's carbon dating - which has been dismissed by the Church - and which puts the Shroud's origins in the early 14th century.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
No, it's merely an attempt to get through to you... you seem to have a closed mind. I could use bold or italicized words instead to emphasize them... but shouting them at you is easier and quicker. I don't have to spend so much time responding by typing in the HTML code. You have repeated the same tired arguments on numerous Shroud threads in the past. . . so why should I waste the effort in doing a better job refuting you?
Please provide any evidence you have that STURP bungled or intentionally sabotaged the science they did... otherwise retract your assertion.
“collusion of idiot scientists and over-protective church leaders, and instead of eight samples from eight areas around the shroud that STURP protocols called for, a single sample was taken from a repaired area”
The samplers weren’t STURPers? I retract nothing, and re-affirm that I believe that the shroud-holders and carbon atom test samplers are either incompetent or malevolent, or else the shroud is medieval, as the tests indicate.
No, the scientists who took the samples were not part of the STURP team. And yes, they were incompetent. They tossed out the agreed protocols and the science the resulting was invalid and a waste... and a shame on them but not on the rest of the science that has been done on the Shroud. These "scientists" went in with an agenda they wanted to prove: they expected and want to prove it was a fraud. Their bias made them sloppy. They were actually gleeful when they made their announcement of medieval origin and their expectations blinded them to the red flags they should have seen in their data.
Other scientists, especially statisticians, saw the red flags. A couple statisticians published peer-reviewed articles questioning the data and its handling in the C14 article, pointing out that there was something fishy about the dating when a single sample had such a wide results from one end to the other, literally outside the range of confidence for the test. The conclusions of both that the scientists should have questioned their own results. Later, the Arizona C14 lab admitted "massaging" the data and averaging their own results, from the smaller samples they cut their sub-sample into, to "make them more acceptable" before submitting them to the project managers, because they "didn't look right." Is this good science, or agenda driven science?
It was one of the STURP team members, the late Dr. Ray N. Rogers, a highly respected pyrology chemist, who believed that the C14 test was valid and who was trying to falsify the hypothesis that the C14 reported a medieval date because it performed on a sample taken from a patched area of the Shroud, revisited the control sample retained from the center of the burned samples taken by the C14 "scientists," and, much to his shock, discovered that the hypothesis was actually correct! Rogers discovered that there were chemical differences from one side of the sample to the other. His investigation uncovered that one side of the sample was made up of dyed cotton, while the other side was original undyed Linen flax Shroud material. It was not homogenous. The C14 scientists had not tested what they thought they were testing.
Later, two other scientists, not associated with STURP, independently, taking two different approaches, confirmed the finding, and concluded that the sample was not homogenous... finding that the sample had been taken from a patched area, combining old, original undyed linen (flax) shroud material and later, added dyed cotton material rewoven in to repair it, thus contaminating the sample, irrepairably distorting the dating. All three studies have been published and peer-reviewed in respected scientific journals. The C14 test has been falsified.
Ergo you should retract your claim that STURP scientists were incompetent or malevolent... and did no valid science. You demonstrate your ignorance of the subject by not knowing what happened. Your bias prevents you from doing so.
Don’t believe that I’ve ever said that the STURP scientists were/are incompetent. Believe you claimed that I did. Also believe that your previous post shows that people working with, for, and around STURP and the church were either incompetent or saboteurs. I re-re-repeat my contention that the shroud-holders and carbon atom test samplers are either incompetent or malevolent, or else the shroud is medieval, as the tests indicate. Has to be one of these three. Which one you think it is? And, hey, if the STURP scientists knew the sampling errors ruined their work, why didn’t they do or say something? Why release known-contaminated results?
...why didn’t they do or say something? Why release known-contaminated results? Why use non-STURP samplers? Why trust non-STURP samplers? Maybe I’ll expand my subset and include the STURPers among the incompetent/malevolent, if they were this careless and trusting.
You know the results of the tests. And you've seen multiple reasons on this thread why those test results are questionable. But even if I did accept the results, who then was the artistic genius that could have created the shroud in the late 1300's? We would certainly know his name if he existed, because he would have been on Leonardo da Vinci's level of creative ability.
Yes, you did... by painting with your broad brush.
Very little science involved in shroudism because the church holds the shroud so tightly. If the church wanted the truth, we’d probably already have the truth, but the church only lets certain, approved people have any access at certain, approved intervals.
You've painted with this brush before. Since 95% of the scientists who have had actual physical access to the Shroud are from STURP, your statements about incompetence and malevolence includes them... and you have never discriminated. Nor have you attempted to do so. You are backtracking now. Your ignorance of the science done on the Shroud shows through, glaringly.
The "shroud-holders" as you so call them, are the OWNERS of the Shroud... it is theirs to do with as they please. That is too bad for you... and us. I would do things differently. It's not my call.
Despite your assertions, the Shroud has been called—by people who know—the single most scientifically studied object in science history.
Yes, the C14 test samplers were both incompetent AND, for some of them, malevolent, at least so far as they had an anti-Christian or anti-Shroud agenda and ignored red-flags because the data they ignored would have lead them away from findings that tended to confirm their cherished and prejudiced non-belief. It was these who allowed their prejudices to lead them to fudge the data to "make it fit" their pre-conceived ideas when it lay outside what they expected!
And, hey, if the STURP scientists knew the sampling errors ruined their work, why didn’t they do or say something? Why release known-contaminated results?
The STURP scientists were deliberately excluded from the C14 panel because of politics. . . and only skeptics were allowed to participate. The STURP panel was considered by the new set to be hopelessly compromised because they had not concluded the Shroud to be a fraud based on the original science. Horrors. They made the wrong conclusion! Ergo, they were called pseudo-scientists and their work declared suspect, despite being peer-reviewed. It made it easy to ignore the protocols the STURP scientists had carefully prepared for any future C14 testing...
The STURP team DID raise many of the objections later, when they found what had actually been done. Before that, they assumed the scientists who had taken the C14 samples and performed the tests were competent, granting to them the professional courtesy they expected in return but obviously did not get. Even afterwards, they defended the tests themselves, showing that the tests accurately dated what was tested.
Unfortunately, the C14 test failed from the very beginning, at the first cut, because of a breakdown in protocol when the scientists allowed only one sample to be taken from only one area of the Shroud—an area that had been agreed to be avoided because it was observed by STURP to be both physically and chemically different than all other areas of the Shroud—instead of the agreed six to eight samples from six to eight areas including image and non-image areas in the original protocol.
Before you mouth off again about there being "very little science" done in "Shroudism", I suggest you might want to read some of the peer-reviewed scientific articles on the Shroud published in respected scientific journals, and those presented at symposia. You will find how wrong you are.
Why release known-contaminated results?
More ignorance on your part, Flowerplough. The C14 test was done in 1988. . . the proof that the sample was contaminated was discovered in 2004-2005. . . Do some reading and study before you make accusations.
So if, by painting with your broad brush, you’re conceding that the shroud was STURP-sampled by incompetents, and is now held by incompetents, and has been long been in the posesssion and protection of incompetents, and had been publicly displayed and passed from hand to hand multiple times in ages past, can you then also champion various pollen samples scientifically discovered in the weave, and stone granules scientifically discovered in the weave, or any other trace particulate evidence discovered in the wave? If the shroud’s held, handled, and protected by incompentents now and has been for almost a thousand years, isn’t it just about ruined, as far as any real science is concerned?
Or am I still just unread, and ignorant?
WOW!
You don't read what I wrote and then reply with your biased agenda! Do you have a reading comprehension problem?
I just got through telling you that STURP had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE INCOMPETENT C14 SAMPLE (yes, I am shouting to get through your thick skull!) and you reply smearing STURP . . . again???? After dishonestly questioning whether you had even done it in the first place?
You are repeating the same pattern you have shown in previous Shroud threads in the past.
Yes, sir, you are unread and ignorant. And, now have proved AGAIN you are just trolling and wasting my time and energy. I am pinging everyone who replied to this thread to let them know not to bother discussing this with you in the future because you are NOT serious in your discussions. Your purpose is to just throw turds.
Thank you for the ping. You will accomplish nothing by trying convince someone with a closed and limited mind. Some people are incapable of objectively looking at facts. They go into any discussion with a preconceived notion and will not let "reality" change their small minds. Hum, you could say they are like Liberals in that way.
In the future this fool should have the decency to ignore threads discussing the Shroud. The poster is just a pot stirrer.
“You don’t read what I wrote...”
Check.
According to that which I do read, the shroud has been handled, fondled, minced and scorched by incompetent church officials, the benighted devoted, investigators, scientists and such since its mysterious appearance in the late 1300s. Granted, the shroudkeepers have been more careful with it as of late, but very little trustworthy material discovery on the shroud has been done, or will ever be done. It’s compromised as evidence, and as a subject of research because of a lost trail of custody, and because of its history of venerable display for venal purpose. And the recent radiocarbon dating, with either bungled or sabotaged sampling, or a medieval-source finding, is just icing on the cupcake.
Give it up Sword, or give up on me. You seem (to me) angrily irrational in your chapter-and-verse Shroud History recitations, and you’ll never change me, or even reach me. I believe you may be sometimes making yourself appear somewhat foolish trying to defend the church’s dirty linen, and trying to figuratively beat what you call sense into me. Give it up.
And, like democrats, and like PDS victims, they cover up their malfeasance with LOUD cries of projection.
Cheers!
Utterly dishonest.
Let's walk through THIS THREAD.
Don’t believe that I’ve ever said that the STURP scientists were/are incompetent. Believe you claimed that I did. Also believe that your previous post shows that people working with, for, and around STURP and the church were either incompetent or saboteurs.
Maybe I’ll expand my subset and include the STURPers among the incompetent/malevolent, if they were this careless and trusting.
So if, by painting with your broad brush, you’re conceding that the shroud was STURP-sampled by incompetents, and is now held by incompetents, and has been long been in the posesssion and protection of incompetents
So, in a matter of six posts (#125 - #129 inclusive) on this one thread, you go from denying you've ever trashed STURP, to saying you *should* trash them, based on other peoples' error, to calling STURP incompetent.
And all this, not in the absence of information, which might have been excusable, but in the face of being told some of the political machinations behind the scenes which ALLOWED the faulty testing despite STURP's objections.
Notice your fundamentally dishonest double standard extant in post #129.
and had been publicly displayed and passed from hand to hand multiple times in ages past, can you then also champion various pollen samples scientifically discovered in the weave, and stone granules scientifically discovered in the weave, or any other trace particulate evidence discovered in the wave? If the shroud’s held, handled, and protected by incompentents now and has been for almost a thousand years, isn’t it just about ruined, as far as any real science is concerned?
So according to you, any physical testing on the Shroud consistent with first-century provenance may be explained away on the basis of lack of chain of custody (a subject *I* first brought up, not you); but any physical testing which appears inconsistent with the first-century provenance (e.g. French-reweaving, C-14 tests) must be accepted as completely genuine as though the Shroud has been kept entirely in a hermetically-sealed chamber since the moment it first existing.
Yeah, you're a lying troll.
The analogy (for FR) would be a PDS troll attacking Sarah Palin for toeing the party line on "pathway to citizenship" or on "resigning early as Governor," and when someone says they support Sarah, claiming the other person is a hypocrite. Despite the existence of a special case.
Here's a hint for those honest people on the thread, and lurkers:
Establish physical mechanism for each of the findings. And yes, "unkown" is a valid choice, it need not be a synonym either for "Pickwickian" or "supernatural." Think of heliobacter pylori and its original reception in the medical community...
Here's a second hint: think of valid established procedures with independent peer-review. Only those who are opposed to the Shroud's authenticity have a longstanding documented history of failing to follow protocol, acting in bad faith (throwing childish temper tantrums at not getting their way), mishandling of samples, hiding samples from independent tests even from their own labs, changing their interpretation of measured results, and generally acting like James Carville.
Cheers!
“... on results, has often been compromised by those with...”
Compromised? You probably mean “questioned”. Or maybe “deigned compromised”.
As completely genuine?
No. My contention is that the tests, with their medieval-origin outcome, were either bungled, sabotaged, or accurate. As with Al Gore and global warming, most scientists involved/questioned seem to believe the publicized findings, but I could see any of the three situations being true. Too bad the “once bitten, twice shy” shroudholders won't double down and resample. As to just about any other test performed or particulate molecule discovered, coincidences may add up, if one trusts the particular coincidence's discoverer, but the shroud's unknown whereabouts (or even existence) in centuries 1-13 don't just cloud the findings, they force-five-gale the scholar's ship.
My contention is that the C-14 tests,...
LOL....my friend, I could have saved you the headaches with this dude. He’s a closed-minded idiot, frankly.
“STURP” members incompetent.......indeed. Ask him if he knows any of them at all. I do; I am best friends with the guy who organized it and lead it....and continued to lead it. He’s a brilliant nuclear physicist and chemist who the Govt. keeps VERY busy to this day (and the man is 70 years old; keeps a pace that would kill a much younger man). The man’s a genius.
So, you admit YOUR dishonesty in discussion... And your trolling.
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.