Shroud of germs (Shroud of Turin theory)

Stephen Mattingly believes the Turin shroud was 'painted' by bacteria from a dying man's body. Laura Spinney meets the Catholic microbiologist challenging the medieval hoax theory

The image of a tall, bearded man bearing the marks of crucifixion that adorn the Turin shroud has never been adequately explained. Those who have attempted to answer the vexed question of the shroud's origins have often found themselves accused of poor science, even vested interests. So it is a brave man who enters the fray with a new and ultimately unprovable theory. But a respected American microbiologist has done just that, and is so convinced he is right, he has lathered himself in germs and put his professional reputation on the line to persuade the rest of us.

Stephen Mattingly of the University of Texas Health Science Centre in San Antonio believes the image on the Turin shroud was created not by human hands or any mystical power, as has been suggested, but by bacteria. The humble microbes, he says, multiplied in the wounds of a person who died very slowly, and whose corpse was then washed and wrapped in a linen sheet in readiness for burial. Washing the body made the wounds sticky, so the cloth stuck fast and became impregnated with bacteria. Finally, says Mattingly, the bacteria died, shedding proteins that gradually oxidised, causing a stain in the cloth that turned yel low and darkened, like a slow developing photograph.

The theory may be simple, but persuading people he is right will not be easy. In 1989, three separate scientific teams published a study of the shroud in the journal Nature. Using radiocarbon dating, they claimed the shroud must have come into being some time between 1260 and 1390 -suggesting that it was a medieval hoax rather than the genuine article. Their paper spawned much speculation as to who might have created the image, including one theory that it was the handiwork of Leonardo da Vinci. Mattingly thinks the three teams got it wrong. Modern bacteria on the linen could have messed up the dating technique, producing a date that was far too recent. He doesn't claim that the individual wrapped in the linen shroud was necessarily Jesus, but he does think microbes, not Leonardo, were the real artists behind the image.

If he is right, his theory could clear up some long-standing mysteries about the image: its striking three-dimensional quality, which he accounts for by varying densities of bacteria accumulating in the nooks and crannies of the dying man's body; the fact that it only appears on one side of the cloth; and, perhaps most damning of all for the artist hypothesis, the complete absence of brushstrokes. "Bacteria do not need a paintbrush," he says.

Mattingly is a Catholic and believes the biblical account of Jesus' death. But he insists the Turin shroud is not the basis for his belief. His experiments are nevertheless based on a set of assumptions gleaned from the Bible and what is known historically about crucifixion. It was the preferred means of dispatching criminals in the first century AD and took as long as 72 hours to kill a man.

Mattingly realised that during those three days, the unfortunate would bleed and lose other body fluids, all of which would encourage bacteria to multiply to unusually high levels.

One of the most common types of bacteria found on the human skin is Staphylococcus epidermidis, usually present in harmless concentrations of around 10m clumps, known as "colony forming units", per square centimetre. Estimating that during crucifixion, this number might increase by up to a hundredfold, Mattingly took swabs of Staphylococcus epidermidis from his skin and grew them, forming a "biofilm", a sugary matrix of microbes which can absorb water, becoming extremely sticky. He then killed the bacteria with heat to avoid infection, and smeared the biofilm back on to his hands and face. Sure enough, Mattingly found that his skin became very sticky where he had smeared on the mixture.

Having lathered on the bacteria, Mattingly applied a damp linen cloth to his hands and face, allowed it to dry, and peeled it off - with no little difficulty. He found the linen bore a straw-yellow imprint of the matching body part that became bolder over subsequent weeks. The bacterial imprint revealed fingernails, a ring and facial features, very similar in quality to the image on the Turin shroud.

Mattingly's findings have yet to be published in a scientific journal, but have already sparked controversy - including a difference of opinion with his collaborator, Barrie Schwortz. Schwortz was the official documenting photographer for the Shroud of Turin Research Project (Sturp), set up by a group of US scientists in the late 1970s.

Schwortz cautions that there seem to be discrepancies between Mattingly's image and the shroud. For instance, the image of Mattingly's face is distorted by the wrap-around effect of the cloth, but the image on the shroud is not. Mattingly is defiant though: "I am convinced that bacteria painted the image," he says. "They would have to have, based on the conditions thatexisted during the crucifixion."

Having examined the shroud, Sturp concluded in 1981 that it contained no pigments, paints, dyes or stains, and that the image was probably created by oxidation and dehydration of the cellulose fibres of the linen itself. That is still the prevailing view, but according to Mattingly, there was not a single microbiologist on the Sturp team, and they only failed to find bacterial pigments because they did not look for them.

Even more contentious, however, is Mattingly's claim that microbes skewed the shroud's radiocarbon date - the claim on which his theory depends. The fragments of the shroud he has seen, he says, are "completely coated" with bacteria, just like any piece of dirty old linen might be. If the radiocarbon dating could be repeated on purified fragments, it might prove to have come from the first century AD, he says.

Robert Hedges at the University of Oxford's research laboratory for archaeology, who was part of the British effort to date the shroud, dismisses that as highly unlikely. "If the shroud was originally 2,000 years old, but is contaminated by modern material to give a date of AD1250, the labs must have measured material contaminated by 60% modern, 20th-century biofilm," he says. "I find this incredible. It would be more biofilm than cellulose."

New tests on purified linen would help to ascertain the truth, says Mattingly, but no further tests are planned. For now, the controversy is set to rage on. "Is this the burial linen of Jesus of Nazareth?" asks Mattingly. "We will never know for certain."

DO you think that Jesus would have left a relic for others to worship?

Why wasn't the cloth mentioned with in the 50 days from crucifixion to pentecost? Sureley someone would have seen it by then? after all he had many followers...If you believe this shroud is Jesus's Shroud, that's fine, If I am wrong, it doesn't matter for my salvation, but if I am right, you wasted alot of faith in a piece of a hoax...Christians are to walk by faith, not by sight, that includes the sight of a piece of cloth, or a vial of copper looking like blood...trickery to decieve...Jesus never used these things...

I suppose one could find a chap of similar features, daub him with ochre, have him lie on a similar sized cloth, fold half over him and gently press to obtain an impression, touch up the details with tempura paint, soil the image a bit to give it a bit of patina and appearance of age, and then there would be a similar object.

This would not correspond to the image on the Shroud because:

1) There is no pigment on the Shroud. The yellowed fibers have been "scorched" by some kind of energy.

3) This image would not be a negative image.

4) This image would not contain an embedded 3D topographic map of a human body.

Before or after the crusades? Before the mingling of the people or after?

What "mingling"? Jewish folks have always been very protective of their heritage, their faith and their traditions. As I understand it, there was little "mingling" with the even Kazarian royalty which converted to Judiasm. It's only these days do I see complaints that Jews are marring outside their faith.

Do you have any photographs or DNA samples of Noah, his sons and, more importantly, their wives? Until you do, I'm afraid you just have a theory based on private opinion, and some anthropologists' opinions who likewise lack photos and DNA samples.

This would not correspond to the image on the Shroud because:

1) There is no pigment on the Shroud. The yellowed fibers have been "scorched" by some kind of energy. - the scorched theory isn't proven...not to mention the artist who did this already confessed.

2) Imagine what an unfolded box would look like compared to a photograph of the front of a box. Using this method, the face would appear to be flattened, because the image would contain orthographic projections of the sides of the head. - not to mention the folds of sheet that wrapped around the face which can produce a negative 3d image, if there was any un orthodox way of placing a sheet on anyone other than laying down on the face, no matter who it was please describe that technique, gravity works on everyone the same way.

3) This image would not be a negative image. - No different than taking a photo, which produces a negetive image

4) This image would not contain an embedded 3D topographic map of a human body. - a 2 dimensional photo doesn't either.

DO you think that Jesus would have left a relic for others to worship?

No Catholic worships the shroud. In fact, the Church hasn't even declared the Shroud to be authentic. No Catholic is obligated to believe in its authenticity.

However, Christ may have left us the Shroud to convince skeptics in our materialist age. Many skeptical scientists who have studied the Shroud have converted.

Why wasn't the cloth mentioned with in the 50 days from crucifixion to pentecost? Sureley someone would have seen it by then?

I don't know. Why didn't anyone mention the whereabouts of the Cross, or Mary's tomb, or the upper room, or Joseph's death?

after all he had many followers...If you believe this shroud is Jesus's Shroud, that's fine, If I am wrong, it doesn't matter for my salvation, but if I am right, you wasted alot of faith in a piece of a hoax...

That doesn't necessarily follow. Learning about the Shroud is certainly of equal or greater value than watching TV, something which you may have done, and the available evidence points to the Shrouds authenticity.

Christians are to walk by faith, not by sight,...

The earth and heavens declare the glory of God.

that includes the sight of a piece of cloth, or a vial of copper looking like blood...trickery to decieve...Jesus never used these things...

Jesus gave us intellects which we are not to despise. Use yours, and you will find it highly probable that Jesus left us with His burial cloth (and almost certainly several Eucharistic miracles).

Christ didn't leave anything...as far as the eucharist is concerned, it is never mentioned in scripture, and to say that Christ declares it in in the last supper, by Catechism standard makes a mockery of God and Christ. Not to mention cannabalistic ritual. It also comes from the egyptian religion of sun worshipping, Transsubstantiation. Do you honestly believ, Christ will come down from his throne, maninifest himself into a wafer (idol worship - Against Gods own law) at the command of an earthly being..to be EATEN and swallowed...there is much to be thinking here. Pagan worship, Cannabalism, and A man commanding God...Don't think so...I used to be catholic...This ritual in itself makes a mockery of Christs' death on the cross and ressurection...

Religious critics have long noted that the Turin shroud is incompatible with the bible, which describes multiple burial wrappings, including a separate “napkin” that covered Jesus’ face (John 20:5–7).

Shroud of Turin Looking More Genuine, Researcher Contends.

Excerpt:

His announcement came in the wake of a Spanish TV report Wednesday on new research which shows that another shroud, venerated for 1,000 years in the Cathedral of Oviedo, Spain, is probably the cloth that covered Christ´s head after his crucifixion.

SNIP

Meanwhile, TV station "Antena 3" said that other research indicates that the relic in Oviedo, in northwest Spain, also has amazing points of coincidence with the Shroud of Turin.

For 12 years a multidisciplinary team of 40 scientists applied modern techniques, used in criminal investigations, on the Oviedo relic. The forensic experts discovered human bloodstains of the AB group, identical to those on the Shroud of Turin.

Amazing- an admitted and proven fake relic has been transmogrified into a miracle by those so weak in their own faith that they have to fabricate nonsense to bolster their belief. It's generally a relatively harmless delusion. I know people who swear the cross was made from dogwood because souvenir selling hucksters in Tennessee concocted a silly fairy tale to move more dogwood merchandise. Of course, there are more serious consequences for the folks that waste their savings financing playboy evangelists or forgoe needed medical treatments for themselves or their children or kiss rattlesnakes because they believe that proves they are faithful. Then there are always those people who get goofy enough to butcher the infidels to get right with their version of divinity...

The Lord left us His Church, "the pillar and foundation of truth," to not only write, canonize and preserve Scripture, but also to interpret it infallibly, lest Christians fall into error.

1 Corinthians 11
For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,
24and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me."
25In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me."
26For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.
28A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup.
29For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.
30That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [i.e., died].

the scorched theory isn't proven...not to mention the artist who did this already confessed.

You mean the medieval artist who painted with radiant energy? There is no pigment on the Shroud. At all. Of any kind. Anywhere on the Shroud. Repeating: there is no pigment on the Shroud. Is this too confusing?

not to mention the folds of sheet that wrapped around the face which can produce a negative 3d image,

It can?

if there was any un orthodox way of placing a sheet on anyone other than laying down on the face, no matter who it was please describe that technique, gravity works on everyone the same way.

Take a piece of paper towel and wrap it around a doll's head. Mark with a pencil the two ears and the two eyes. Now unfold the paper towel. The two eyes will be in the proper position but the sides of the head will also be facing forward. On the left you will see the left side of the head with the ear in the center, in the center you will have the face and on the right you will have the right side of the head with the ear in the center. The "face" will be three times wider than normal. This experiment has been done many times, and this is the constant result.

Now imagine a sheet placed over a body which emits a burst of energy. The sheet would be "scorched" in proportion to its distance from the body. Highpoints, like the nose, would produce a more intense image, thus producing an embedded 3D topographic image. This theory conforms perfectly with the actual image on the Shroud. This is why most scientists who have studied the Shroud believe that image on the Shroud originated in this way.

No different than taking a photo, which produces a negetive image

The concept of a negative image didn't exist until the 1800's, 700 years after the time when this image was allegedly forged.

This image would not contain an embedded 3D topographic map of a human body. - a 2 dimensional photo doesn't either.

Which is what makes the image all the more remarkable. I am a 3D computer artist, so I know how this works. If you import a grayscale image into a 3D program as a terrain map, the lightest areas become high points and the darkest areas become valleys. When the image was run through a NASA terrain analyzer in the mid '70s a virtual 3D image of a man resulted. How could a medeival forger do this?

The recent study by the Texas team was conducted on a linen sample allegedly taken from the lower right corner of the shroud. However, the Archbishop of Turin, Cardinal Giovanni Saldarini, has publicly challenged the sample's authenticity. He stated that both he and the Vatican "declare that they cannot recognize the results of the claimed experiments."

Nickell points out that, even if the sample did come from the shroud, its location was far away from any alleged "blood" stains. "This is suspicious in itself and raises serious questions," states Nickell. "The persons involved should promptly and fully clarify the source and location of all the samples allegedly removed from the shroud."

Walter McCrone, who has, he says, "examined thousands of fibers from 32 different areas of the 'Shroud,'" maintains that the fibers shown in the team's photomicrographs "did not come from the 'Shroud' of Turin."

The notion that contamination could alter the carbon date from the first to the fourteenth century is "ludicrous," McCrone says, adding: "A simple calculation shows that a weight of modern biological material necessary to raise the shroud date 1300 years would weigh twice as much as the shroud by itself."

http://www.csicop.org/articles/shroud/index.html

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.