[shroudie]

Orionblamblam, you don't read except between the line. Good trick. I said that your anti-miracle bias is showing and is unscientific. The point is not to look from a miracle point of view or an anti-miracle point of view but from a scientific point of view.

To accuse the other person of irrational thinking without explanation or accuse the other person of wishful thinking without justification is just blowing smoke. That is all you are doing.

I have no idea how the images were formed. I have no idea if they are perfectly natural or the by-product of a miracle. I am quite certain that they are not fake. The scientific evidence on this is quite clear. I do know that the carbon 14 tests are discredited (and yes there is evidence that the cloth is much older).

Get over it.

[orionblamblam]

> you don't read except between the line

Well, when debating with Creationists, shroudists, witch doctors and their ilk, one must be mindful that what they say is not what they mean, and one *MUST* read between the lines.

> said that your anti-miracle bias is showing and is unscientific.

It is hardly unscientific to be skeptical of claims of mitracles, given that there ahve been NO miracles in recorded history that can not be more rationally explained via materialistic means... often, hoaxes and frauds.

> from a scientific point of view.

Then, prove that a mitracle was involved here. Demonstrate conclusively that the shroud is 1970 years old, not 650. Demonstrate that there is no conceivable material process that can cause an image like this to be imprinted upon a cloth. Demonstrate conclusively that this was the image of *one* *specific* *idnividual,* not just some random guy. Then, MAYBE, you will be heading down the road to providing evidence of a miracle.

> I have no idea if they are perfectly natural or the
by-product of a miracle.

That being the case... if material processes are still within the realm of possibility... miracles must, scientifically, be set aside.

I've seen some astonishingly weird crap in my days. Things within rocket motors that survived intact when they should have been vaporized and shot into the test stand hillside. Incredible strong materials visibly undamaged, but messed up on a microscopic scale such that I could crush them in my hands. Materials that withstand pressures that are orders of magnitude greater than require to burst them to flinders. People I respected voting for Bill CLinton *twice*. These defy easy explanation... but I do not fall back on the intellectual laziness of "miracle." Sometimes, physical processes produce things that are just plain difficult to explain. And given the astonishly little scientific analysis that has actually be done upon the Shroud (snippets here, some fibers there... wholly inadequate; any forensic investigator woudl throw up his hands), it's hardly surprising that this has not yet been firmly nailed down.

> I am quite certain that they are not fake. The scientific evidence on this is quite clear.

You have no evidence of this whatsoever. What you have is a mystery, and I can assure you that people can do some damned mysteriosu things.