Posted on 10/10/2002 2:14:50 AM PDT by SteveH
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:57:54 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
GURAT, France, Sept. 24 (UPI) -- The Turin Shroud bearing the features of a crucified man may well be the cloth that enveloped the body of Christ, a renowned textile historian told United Press International Tuesday.
Disputing inconclusive carbon-dating tests suggesting the shroud hailed from medieval times, Swiss specialist Mechthild Flury-Lemberg said it could be almost 2,000 years old.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Your logic does not flow... why, if it is a photographic negative does that provide you with MORE proof that it is a hoax?
The knowledge that the Shroud appears to be a "photographic negative" is one of items hardest to explain and most difficult to understand how it could have been created given the state of art at the time frame a hoax could have been perpetrated.
The part that I was mainly responding to is that the image is only on one side. This clearly means that it is a painting or a photographic negative or something similar. Otherwise, if Jesus "exited the body during the Resurrection", the image would be on both sides of the cloth.
Besides, I'd already made up my mind on this when I realized that the hair was not falling backwards (as it would if the body were on its back), but was hanging as if the body were standing up.
Okay... I see where your coming from on this. Assuming the passage of Jesus' soul through the cloth, it would logically be assumed the effect would be consistent throughout the route of passage. However, no one has stated this as a hypothesis. The hypothesis that is closest is that some radiation exited the BODY that did not penetrate beyond the surface fibers of the cloth. This radiation appears to have been vertically collimated but up and down with no horizontal component. The resurrected then Jesus physcally removed the shroud just as would anyother person arising from a bed with covers (although most people wrap around the feet, not the head).
"Besides, I'd already made up my mind on this when I realized that the hair was not falling backwards (as it would if the body were on its back), but was hanging as if the body were standing up."
Another good point and researchers have investigated this. A crucified man would have sweated profusely. The hair would have been heavily soaked with blood from the crown of thorns as well as covered with sweat. After drying the hair would be extremely stiff. In addition, the common practice of the era was to place a bandage/scarf tied under the jaw and over the top of the head to keep the mouth closed in death. When volunteers with long hair were laid supine on their backs with their jaws tied in this manner, their hair sweat soaked and partially dried stiff, it was observed that their hair lay forward partially supported by the cloth jaw binding hidden under the beard and hair, exactly in the manner seen on the Shroud. I have seen a photograph of this experiment and diagrams of the binding.
Assuming the passage of Jesus' soul through the cloth, it would logically be assumed the effect would be consistent throughout the route of passage. However, no one has stated this as a hypothesis. The hypothesis that is closest is that some radiation exited the BODY that did not penetrate beyond the surface fibers of the cloth.
From the article SteveH posted:
"She said the outline of the body looked somewhat like burn marks, but only in the top 2 millimeters of the cloth. ... Some theologians believe this may have occurred as Christ's body exited the shroud during his resurrection.
...the common practice of the era was to place a bandage/scarf tied under the jaw and over the top of the head... When volunteers with long hair were laid supine on their backs with their jaws tied in this manner, their hair sweat soaked and partially dried stiff, it was observed that their hair lay forward partially supported by the cloth jaw binding hidden under the beard and hair, exactly in the manner seen on the Shroud.
Not exactly in the manner seen on the Shroud. The hair on the Shroud is perfect, beautiful, composed, painted.
There also doesn't apppear to be any distortion in the image of the hair due to the binding being wrapped on top of the head.
"by what factor must the contaminants outweigh the Shroud to get a date of 1275 AD for the combined sample?"
Since the abundance at t=0 is fixed at 10-10 the factor, at t=0 is 1.17 and at tfire, it's 1.18. The total C contamination number of particles, or weight is only ~18% higher than the original cloth C.
Think about what you're saying. According to your model, 18% contamination in 1275 makes the entire Shroud appear to date to 1275, 727 years down the road. Does that sound right to you?
Suppose the contamination occurred at 40 A.D. How much contamination would it take to make it look (to us in 2002) as if the Shroud were dated to 1275 A.D.?
Answer: They will have to add one gallon of alcohol to each gallon of 70% to make the mixture 85% pure.
x / (x + S) = 0.85
Assume total is 100 to simplify. Then S is fixed @ 30 and already have 70 alc.
rearranging above gives:
x = 0.85(S) / ((1-0.85)
plug in S=30:
x = 170, but have 70, so add 100 alc to get 200 total of ).85% alc.
************************* The examiner finds: %14C = 88.1*10-10 %, corresponding to a death date for cellulose growth of ~1275.
Co = original C
No = original 14C
Ccontam = C from contaminants
Ncontam = 14C from contaminants
88.1*10-10 = 0.71No + xNo / ((0.71No+xNcontam) + Co*10-10 + Ccontam*10-10)
10-10 = Ncontam / Ccontam = xNo / xCo = No / Co
so:
Co = No / 10-10 and
Ccontam = xNo / 10-10
Simplifying gives:
88.1 = 0.71 + x / (1 + x)
Doh! I should have done this to begin with. So for recent contamination x = 1.44.
I had 0.88~0.88/1.17, thanks for your patience.
If the contam. came from the fire:
88.1 = 0.71 + 0.896x / (1 + x), then x = 11.4
Now I see where they would be analyzing contamination, not cloth. The bugs though, would have to be converting CO2 from sunlight to put 14C in. I can't see that.
What is the proportion of carbon in the threads? What is the proportion of carbon in the contaminants (After water loss)? Unless they are similar, or the carbon in the threads occurs at a higher rate, the cited equations seem less than relevant. Do you disagree?
Soot would seem to be fairly pure carbon. I don't recall the proportion of carbon in skin cells, or in common bacteria.
Additionally, the contamination was assumed to be intermittent, but common, on the macro scale (The Shroud was often handled, and even kissed), but likely continuous on the micro scale. I don't believe that anyone has suggested that the item in question was sequestered away in an inert or isolated environment for any significant portion of its existence - however long that may be. Would not this continuous turnover drastically change the equations?
BTW, my interest is not on religious grounds. I simply consider the shroud a curiousity, and a puzzle to be unravelled.
Did I get this correct?
Minor differences occur due to the half-life being different in solar years (5730?), but they are not significant for the purposes of the example (3% of 5.68%, and so on).
|
|
|||
Gods |
Note: this topic is from October 2002. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.