“Interesting fact... the heights of medieval knights was thought to be fairly short because of measurements of surviving suits of armor. That has since been found to be erroneous. Excavations of burials of knights have found that they were actually fairly robust and tall men. In most cases indistinguishable from the heights of modern men. The food the knights received as children was usually excellent, being of the nobility, and therefore they were not deprived of anything in their childhood.”
I cannot help but wonder where in the heck you get your information. Knights ate better than peasants, but to say they ate “excellent” is ignorant of history. Indeed, we see knights from one region taller than knights from another depending on how well one region is doing compared to the other during specific time frames. The diet in Europe varied in terms of adequacy much more than today and even much more than in some areas during the Bronze age. Body heights fluctuated accordingly. But, the nut of our topic would relate it to the shroud, you believe that your hypothesis (which is wrong) that knights were taller on average...than jews were on average...a millenium plus before constitutes evidence that the Shroud has to be a fake...and your evidence that Jesus is not tall is that because Judas pointed him out to the Romans that came to arrest him...that is ridiculous and any reasonable individual understands that. Again, I ask you...what genetic traits does God have? God is the father of Jesus Christ after all...or are you saying that you have proof that God is not the father of Jesus? If so, let’s hear it...
Wpin, I think you are confusing me with Joe. You are addressing this comment to Swordmaker. I am NOT ignorant of history. The upper classes did indeed eat excellently in almost every period... unlike the peasantry... they got the largess of the land. They had diets that were varied and replete with proteins in meats and vegetables and carbohydrates. Depending on the area, often even the peasants ate well.
My point about Knights being short was that the research was based on measuring the ARMOR... which was a red herring... because the armor they were measuring was not armor for adult knights. The point being that before one can make conclusions, one better be sure the data one is using is adequate to make the conclusion. Joe's is not.
I thought I answered this question the last time you asked it, in post #222:
BroJoeK from #224: "To my knowledge, no DNA analysis has been attempted or is even possible on the Shroud image.
"If it were, we would expect ordinary human DNA, since both the Bible and Christian theology insist that Jesus was fully human."
I'm sure you know that from the beginning, orthodox Christian theology (as contrasted to, say, Arianism or Gnosticism) has always insisted that Jesus was not only fully divine, but also fully human. Therefore, if it were even possible to extract original DNA from the Shroud (which it most surely is NOT), then we would fully expect to find there fully human DNA.
Do you disagree?