Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Rich21IE

All of this is irrelevant.

Since 1898, it has been known that the image on the Shroud is a photographic negative—a thing that no human being could have conceived, let alone produced, before the advent of photography. Repeated attempts by competent artists, in modern times, to paint negatives, have produced nothing but grotesque images.

Since 1978, it has been discovered that the gradations of the image on the Shroud correspond to the DISTANCE of the surfaces of the body on the Shroud from the surface of the cloth—something that no one was capable of conceiving or detecting before digital analysis of images was possible.

Since 1978, it has been discovered that the image exists on the surface of the fibers of the Shroud—that no pigment or other material foreign to the fabric itself is present.

Anyone who suggests that this image was produced by hand—in the Middle Ages or any other time—is simply ignoring a vast body of hard data about the Shroud, and is an idle, irresponsible dilettante.


45 posted on 03/28/2013 2:44:28 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan (If you're FOR sticking scissors in a female's neck and sucking out her brains, you are PRO-WOMAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]


To: Arthur McGowan
Anyone who suggests that this image was produced by hand—in the Middle Ages or any other time—is simply ignoring a vast body of hard data about the Shroud, and is an idle, irresponsible dilettante.

Well said.

56 posted on 03/30/2013 12:57:34 PM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


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