Replies

You wrote: "Non sequitur. You consider "fraud" as an explanation not because someone might suggest it, but because "fraud" explains it."

Fair enough on the non sequitur. But that is the rub. There is no suitable explanation for fraud. Or is there, please?

To obtain an amine/saccharides product in a starch fraction/saccharides coating requires an amine source. To get a microscopic implementation of discontinuities of these changed states requires a mechanism. Liquid would not provide the hatching patterns observed but a gaseous diffusion would. Liquid amine solutions would result in saturation peaks and there are none in the Shroud image. Keep in mind that the starch fraction/saccharides coating is found only at the evaporation surface of the cloth. That such a reaction will occur for a rather wide range of ambient temperatures and humidity that might be found in a tomb from a dead body. The body will produce the heavier amines in its tissues such as putrescine (1,4-diaminobutane), and cadaverine (1,5-diaminopentane). Color will be produced. That is a fact. Saturation peaks might occur but unlike with liquid, they need not necessarily occur if reactant exhaustion takes place.

So, for fraud, we probably need a means of applying gaseous amines.

Keep in mind that the images are extraordinarily faint. They only become visible at a distance of from six feet to fifteen feet. As the reactions are slow to build in normal ambient temperatures (maybe 10 to 30 hours) the image development with be almost impossible to observe in the early stages even from a greater distance.

We’ll need a great deal of precision in our method to ensure that we get clear images on contusions and abrasions.

Keep in mind, too, that we have a lot of other things to do to make our fraud. We need to insert pollen from the middle east. We need to apply travertine aragonite. We need to apply the blood. We’ll need a human being for this as there is no way to paint blood clots and serum separation. We must have contact.

We’ll need to get access to the Sudarium from the Cathedral in Oviedo to make sure that our human for the blood transfer has identical wound and blood flows.

What is this fraud “explanation” you have that meets these image criteria?

Orionblamblam, this is posted, not for your benefit, but those who understand science:

M. Sue Benford and Joseph Marino, in collaboration with number of textile experts, identified clear evidence of medieval mending on the Shroud. A patch was expertly sewn to or rewoven into the fabric to repair a damaged edge. It was from this patch—quite likely nothing more than a piece of medieval cloth—that the samples were taken. From documenting photographs of the sample areas, the textile experts identified enough newer thread to permit Ronald Hatfield, of the prestigious radiocarbon dating firm Beta Analytic, to estimate that the true date of the cloth is much older—perhaps even 1st century.

Independently, Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan and Raymond N. Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California Los Alamos National Laboratory have explored the chemical nature of the sample area. They have confirmed the finding of Benford and Marino. Ultraviolet photography and spectral analysis show that the area from which the samples were taken was chemically unlike the rest of the cloth. Chemical analysis reveals the presence of Madder root dye and an aluminum oxide mordant (a reagent that fixes dyes to textiles) not found elsewhere on Shroud. Medieval artisans often dyed threads in this manner when mending damaged tapestries. This was simply to make the repairs less noticeable. The presence of Madder root and mordant suggests that the Shroud was mended in this way.

Microchemical tests also reveal vanillin (C8H8O3 or 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzaldehyde) in an area of the cloth from which the carbon 14 sample were cut. But the rest of the cloth does not test positive for it. Vanillin is produced by the thermal decomposition of lignin, a complex polymer, a non-carbohydrate constituent of plant material including flax. Found in medieval materials but not in much older cloths, it diminishes and disappears with time. For instance, the wrappings of the Dead Sea scrolls do not test positive for vanillin.

Let me quote Ray Rogers, UCLA Science Fellow, a former chief scientist at Los Alamos Laboratories:

"I believe that this is one of the most important photographs [look above in this thread] of the Shroud that has been taken. It shows the fluorescence of the area of the radiocarbon sample. It proves that the radiocarbon sample did not have the same chemical composition as the rest of the cloth. This is a fact - not an interpretation. . .

"Notice that the entire area above the Raes sample and along the seam is darker than the main part of the cloth. It does not fluoresce. . .Its chemical composition is different from the Shroud. That is exactly the area sampled for the 1988 dating fiasco. . .

"The radiocarbon sample was invalid. No strange, magical events are needed to explain the invalid date. I do not know what the real date is, but I know the sample used in 1988 did not yield a valid date. The poor preparation for sampling in 1988, the poor verification of the sample, the failure to follow written protocols, and the unrealistic claims made about "unreliable" radiocarbon dating have done great damage."

OBB, did you catch those words: "It proves that the radiocarbon sample did not have the same chemical composition as the rest of the cloth. This is a fact - not an interpretation. . . "

> So, for fraud, we probably need a means of applying gaseous amines.

You assume no fading over the centuries, or that only this one means of production is possible.

> Keep in mind that the images are extraordinarily faint.

...*today.*

> We need to insert pollen from the middle east. We need to apply travertine aragonite.

Easily done if this was done in the middle east, or if the shroud was from there.

> We’ll need a human being for this as there is no way to paint blood clots and serum separation.

Ah, there's a problem... you'll need a human of extraordinary proportions... and extra physical dimensions, as the image on the shroud does not actually reflect realistic human geometry. And in any event... blood isn't exactly rare, especially in an era when "cure for *anything*" meant "leaches and bleeding out the bad humours."

> We’ll need to get access to the Sudarium from the Cathedral in Oviedo ...

Possible, if the thing was on display. And has the Sudarium been C-14 dated? But then, I did a Google on the Sudarium... found lots of claims that the bloodstains match up, but no actual evidence.

But this is an interesting side-topic... either the shroud and the smaller cloth have staisn that are identical, or they don't. If they don;t, then they can be reasonably determiend to be unrelated. If they *do*, then carbon dating the Sudarium will tell you the age of the shroud, yes?