Fresh tests on Shroud of Turin

Telegraph ^ | 25 Feb 2008 | Jonathan Petre

[lonevoice]

ping

[Swordmaker]

It's Shroud of Turin season again... it happens every year before Easter.

The Head of the Oxford lab that did 1/4th of the 1988 C14 tests on the shroud admits the tests might be invalid... but suggests only 2% contamination from something could have skewed the results. His statements and this article ignore the already peer-reviewed findings that show that the 1988 C14 tests are invalid because they tested samples that included between 40 and 60% original Shroud linen mixed with between 60 and 40% 16th Century rewoven material.

My viewpoint is that the Oxford lab will complete their tests (done NOT on Shroud material but on other materials) and conclude their tests were accurate... which they were on what they tested: a melange of old and newer material.

PING!

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

[maine-iac7]

Arguing with the shroud denyers is much like arguing with committed Darwinists... Goracles.... They are right, argument closed, no other opinions allowed. That’s not science.

[Swordmaker]

"There have been numerous theories purporting to explain how the tests could have produced false results, but so far they have all been rejected by the scientific establishment.

Actually, this statement in the article is not accurate.

Peer reviewed scientific research, published in a prestigious scientific journal, has provided a theory that has been proven to be true... the tests produced false results for the age of the Shroud because they tested a sample that was a mixture of older (perhaps, even most likely First Century) with newer (Probably 16th century patching rewoven into the original) material.

[maine-iac7]

Blood

I'll call ya one and raise ya one -

-

http://www.shroudstory.com/faq/turin-shroud-faq-02.htm

Alan Adler was an expert on porphyrins, the types of colored compounds seen in blood, chlorophyll, and many other natural products. He and Dr. John Heller, MD, studied the blood flecks on the STURP sampling tapes [Heller and Adler, Applied Optics 19, (16) 1980]. They converted the heme into its parent porphyrin, and they interpreted the spectra taken of blood spots by Gilbert and Gilbert. They concluded that the blood flecks are real blood. In addition to that, the x-ray-fluorescence spectra taken by STURP showed excess iron in blood areas, as expected for blood. Microchemical tests for proteins were positive in blood areas but not in any other parts of the Shroud.

http://creationevolutiondesign.blogspot.com/2007/06/bogus-shroud-of-turin-9-bloodstains-on.html

"pathologist Dr Pier Luigi Baima-Bollone" has "not only confirmed it to be blood, but confidently identified it as the AB group" which "is comparatively rare among Europeans ... its incidence is 18 per cent among Jewish populations of the present-day Near East":

[curmudgeonII]

,I.Besides, Jesus came from an extremely wealthy family and could have eaten whatever he wanted for nourishment.

I didn't know that carpenters in classical Roman times were extremely wealthy.

[Swordmaker]

70 inches, 5’10”, a little tall for a Jewish carpenter from 2000 years ago?.........

Actually, no. Studies done by archaeologists of bodies found in 1st Century Jewish cemeteries in Jerusalem show that the average height of male skeletons is only 3/8 of an inch shorter than average modern American males (5' 8.5"). A height of 5'10" is well within the normal range of variation.

"A more recent excavation in Meiron in the area of Galilee, more skeletal remains from the 1st through the 4th centuries, revealed an adult male height average of five feet nine inches."

Average height of Romans of the period was a little less.

[SpringheelJack]

But such an approach does not square with other properties of the shroud, i.e. the image is not merely on the surface of the fibers.

What you're really talking about is technique. Joseph Nickell's recreation did get deeper into the fibers than the Shroud itself does, but the medieval artisan who made it may have used a variation that did not imprint the image as deep.

[SpringheelJack]

Oh-kay.

[Dionysius]

Faith, in a spritual sense, is a belief in the truth of something even if it defies the disproof provided by one’s own senses. For instance I believe that the consecrated Host is the Body of Christ with every fiber of my being. Faith is a gift and cannot be over-ridden by the Scientific Method or by the jeers of those unfortunate enough not to be granted so great a gift.

[Just mythoughts]

I didn't know that carpenters in classical Roman times were extremely wealthy.

Joseph of Arimathea, Christ's uncle was a wealthy tin miner. It was Joseph's tomb, never used before where Christ was laid after His death on the cross. We are told little about where Christ was and went prior to His last three + years of life in a flesh body.

[fatima]

Here’s a nice link with lot’s of info and pics.

http://www.shroudstory.com/

[SpringheelJack]

There could be a very good reason for that - It's existence was protected for centuries to keep it from being confiscated and or destroyed - hate to burst the bubble, but everything that happened back then did not make it into the scriptures, and many books of scripture that the early church was using were burned as a result of the Nicence Council - who decided which books ,would and which would not, be compiled to become the Bible.

Disputes about Scripture left a long public record over several centuries, spoken of by writers like Irenaeus, Eusebius, and Athanasius, plus others ranging from the famous to the obscure -- exactly something that the Shroud of Turin lacks. The idea that all knowledge of the Shroud was hidden by a secret cabal from the death of Jesus to the Second Millennium is positively ludicrous. What other conspiracy was so successful, and so motiveless? (The church during that period prized relics when they could find them, the "discovery" of the True Cross in about 320 by the Emperor's mother was renowned.)

[SpringheelJack]

Right back at ya, buddy -

There is no blood on the Shroud: all the forensic tests specific for blood have failed18 (although some investigators19 unrigorously concluded that blood was present after conducting numerous forensic tests for iron, protein, albumin, etc., which came up positive because these materials are indeed on the Shroud in the form of tempera paint). Old blood is not bright red, and no amount of bilirubin20 can explain that away. Real blood mats on hair, and does not form perfect rivulets and spiral flows. Real blood does not contain red ochre, vermilion, and alizarin red pigments. Real blood and its organic derivatives have refractive indices much less than red ochre or vermilion, and they can be easily distinguished using Becke line movement under a light microscope. McCrone's examination of the red particles on the Shroud samples revealed no blood or blood derivatives.

http://www.freeinquiry.com/skeptic/shroud/as/schafersman.html

[SpringheelJack]

Joseph of Arimathea, Christ's uncle was a wealthy tin miner.

You're inserting late, late medieval legend into the ancient 1st century accounts. If Joseph of Arimathea was a wealthy tin miner it is not known to history, nor is there any reason to suspect he was. Same goes for that "Christ's uncle" business.

[SkyPilot]

Thanks Swordmaker - always love your posts.

[grey_whiskers]

Your information is outdated.

I googled Shroud of Turin and found this from a skeptic site. No need for red ochre...Maillard reactions fit the actual image on the shroud much better.

They have the *disadvantage* from your point of view of still remaining consistent with (but not disposative of) the authenticity of the shroud; OTOH, they require no miraculous explanation either...which should help you with your worldview. :-)

What is a Maillard reaction (Chemistry): Shroud of Turin FAQ

Cheers!

[Just mythoughts]

You're inserting late, late medieval legend into the ancient 1st century accounts. If Joseph of Arimathea was a wealthy tin miner it is not known to history, nor is there any reason to suspect he was. Same goes for that "Christ's uncle" business.

Did NOT Joseph of Arimathea collect Christ's body, only a relative could have done that act? Now where did Mary get taken to.... where did the legends of the tin miner come from?

[Alberta's Child]

Check out Post #310 on the thread linked below. This topic came up here on FR a couple of years ago, and the information I've posted there offers some interesting insight into the subject:

Click Here

[maine-iac7]

Jesus from a rich family ?

Yep = looking like it.

The word that was, on purpose or through error, written for 'carpenter' translates as 'builder' = meaning a contractor...and in Jesus time, the city of Sepphoris was being rebuilt by Rome - just a bit over 3 miles from Nazareth...a shining marble city on a hill, easily seen - and an easy walk - from Nazareth.

It was the crossroads of travel and trade from many countries, Greek and Latin were spoken.

Scholars are now postulating that Jesus and his 'father' Joseph may well have found much lucrative work there.

As well, Joseph of Arimathea, widely thought to be Jesus' uncle, was a wealthy man and member of the Pharisees. His fortune came from tin mines in England.

Remember, he went to, and received from, Pilot permission to take Jesus' body for burial. Law restricted that privilege only of kin of a crucified "criminal" = They were evidently not a poor family - and that does not, in any way, detract from Jesus or His mission ...