Michael Larkin
Member
A very interesting recent video on the Shroud:
Carbon dating, dinosaurs and the shroud of Turin
- Thread starter Roms
- Start date
C14 dating is useful to about 60 thousands year do to its halflife limits. It can't be used on objects older than that and certainly not on objects millions of year old.
Agreed. You can't carbon date an object million of years old.
Well, technically you can put the object inside a AMS, but I think the best explanation for the "dates" is contamination.
Trancestate
Member
Michael, you might also like this documentary:
Shroud of Turin: Material Evidence
(also on YouTube, but sound is mono:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2Sw7N3GjUU)
I've watched a lot of Shroud videos. In my view, this is one of the most informative, and is my personal favorite (so far).
Doug
Trancestate
Member
By the way, Dan Porter, who appeared several times in this video, runs one of the best blogs on the Shroud:
http://shroudstory.com/
The blog post comment sections are where most of the action is. Lots of very knowledgeable readers debate all kinds of issues in depth. Reading their comments can be an educational experience.
Doug
Correct
Michael, this is actually one of the best video's on the shroud because the evidence is so great for the authenticity of the shroud that when they got through making a digital picture of the face of the man on the shroud, it is very likely that you are looking at the face of the historic Jesus. You could see the look on the man's face who was in charge of doing this, It was priceless.
I will start posting some good presentation video's showing what science and history know so far on the shroud of turin.
You guys will really like this stuff.
I am a Catholic myself but I am very serious when I say this.Out of all the people from all the different worldviews that have done research and studied the shroud, It has been the agnostics that have done that have come up with some of the best evidences for the shroud's authenticity and scientific research as far as the image itself is concerned, and I believe it will be agnostics that will continue to give us the best research on the shroud, simply because Agnostics have no dog to hunt in this race and can come at the shroud in more of an honest and unbiased way.
Agnostic Lawyer Mark Antonacci was a happy go lucky Agnostic who had only one problem. His Christian Girlfriend. Everything was going great in their life accept for the constant arguments about religion.
Well one day out of frustration he set out to prove to her that Christianity was a fairy tale . Unfortunately he picked the shroud as his first object to debunk. What he thought would take 2 weeks ended up taking 20 years and not only could he not debunk the shroud but he himself converted to Christianity because of his research into the shroud. His Christian girlfriend is longer a part of his life now, but she left her mark in an amazing way.
He is no spearheading a team of scientists that want to petition the Vatican to test the shroud for neutrinos . Its a daring mission because if they find neutrinos in the blood on the shroud image, that would really go a long way towards giving massive evidence for what could only be one event, the resurrection of Christ.
Its a long shot because I believe the testing involves the blood on the shroud image, and possibly the destruction of some of that blood, so the Vatican most likely wont allow it because they consider the blood to be sacred, but Antonacci sure has a lot of Guts.
https://www.facebook.com/testtheshroud
There will also be a big shroud conference
http://www.stlouisshroudconference.com/
Another Agnostic who was very important when it came to shroud research was Doctor August Accetta whose research in the area of nuclear radiation and the shroud image was extremely influential towards having a little better understanding of the shroud image. HE actually ingested potentially harmefull radioactive material and passed gamma rays through his body. HE came closest of all almost all other researchers to duplicating many of the unique features of the shroud (though his research couldn't produce a facial image, plus it didn't give us the incredible image clarity that the shroud gives us).
I believe he has 4 peer reviewed papers on the shroud of turin in the area of nuclear radiation and last I heard he runs the Shroud Center of Southern California.
Last edited:
Porter's site is no longer a place I visit because it has turned into a madhouse where they would allow pseudoskeptics to post with barely a slap on the wrist and some of them bring up theories time and time again that have been debunked many years ago.
I like Stephen Jones's shroud blog as he tends to keep things focused on the evidences at hand without the blog getting congested with pseudoskeptics who aren't really interested in finding the truth about the shroud
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/
Sorry folks but im dealing with avery bad situation with my Dad being in ICU from multiple strokes and stage 4 prostate cancer so please excuse me if I didn't see some of your replies here and there.
Michael Larkin
Member
Thanks for the video, Doug. I suppose the main thing that puzzled me was that there was no mention of where the linen sample used for radiocarbon dating was taken from: the video I posted claimed it was from a suspect area. So even if the hypothesis about CO contamination doesn't pan out, there may be other reasons for possible discrepancies. And, because of the flawed conservation exercise carried out in 2002, it may have become more difficult to do future testing.
Whatever the truth of the matter, it's an incontrovertible fact that no one knows how to produce a similarly detailed image today on linen; it's all the more extraordinary that it should have been produced in the 13th, 5th or 1st centuries.
Trancestate
Member
If you're referring to the kerfuffle over Colin Berry's rude posts, Dan Porter resolved the issue in March, 2012:
http://shroudstory.com/2012/03/12/regrettably/
That aside, there are many aspects to Shroud research. Within some of those aspects there exist points of disagreement even among educated proponents of its authenticity. I enjoy reading the give and take on those points and simply skip over obviously uninformed or incoherent posts.
Indeed, Jones has written some fine, well-researched articles. But I must admit that I feel some concern over his Christian fundamentalist evangelical outlook. Rightly or wrongly, I'm afraid it may cause him to lose a bit of objectivity. (For those unfamiliar with Jones, see another one of his blogs, Jesus is Jehovah).
You have my deepest sympathies... Coincidentally, my stepfather is probably dying of lung cancer. A second test to find the cancer has been scheduled for tomorrow. Even if the test turns up positive, I fear my stepfather will starve to death before the cancer gets him. He's had almost no appetite for the past couple of weeks and has been losing weight at an alarming rate.
Doug
Last edited:
Thank you so much for your deepest well wishes my friend. My prayers are with you and your step dad, and if you ever need a friend to talk to, you have one now.
Have you looked at the different alternative treatments yet. I don't know where you and your step dad are at but there is one clinic in Los Angeles called the Bicher cancer clinic that uses a method called hyperthermia in which they heat the body or parts of it to 108 degrees and zaps it with a very low dose of radiation ( I was told the same amount that you would get from taking an xray) and I heard that there are very little if any side effects. The treatment is covered by PPO insurance.
I was getting ready to take my dad there for 6 months right after his operation but then 2 days after his operation he started to suffer a series of strokes and now it doesn't look good for him at all as he is in ICU. My dad was the best friend I ever had. We did everything together. He is my father, brother and best friend all rolled into one person. He is my angel. He was a simple mountain man from a village of 300 people.
Today when I first saw him in ICU I Kissed every toe on his legs :(
Doug like I said If you ever need someone to talk to, just pm me anytime u need to.
Take care of urself my friend
As far as Colin Berry is concerned, this wasn't the only time he tossed ad hom attacks at someone. His continued ad hom attacks against Agnostic Chemist Ray Rogers of Los Alamos labs is what got me to leave that blog. Rogers was a man of science which was why he was made a senior fellow at los Alamos labs. For someone like colin berry to attack his peer reviewed work is ridiculous. What I find even more ridiculous is that the blog there will just edit any insulting ad homs by berry, when the right thing to do is to ban him from ever posting on that blog again. This is what almost all blogs would have done .
I have a great respect for Rogers because he approached the shroud from a scientifically neutral position. Like I said, I have a deep respect for the work done by agnostics on the shroud because of their track record with it.
I have a great respect for Rogers because he approached the shroud from a scientifically neutral position. Like I said, I have a deep respect for the work done by agnostics on the shroud because of their track record with it.
The 2002 restoration was a regrettable thing to happen to the shroud. Rogers was angry and frustrated that it might skew future testing results because of the way it was done.
whats even more amazing are the xray features of the shroud image in the areas of the left femur, hands, wrists, head, jaw, gums and Teeth. Its a lot harder to see in a copy of the shroud online but it seems like, in live presentations that its a lot easier to see, especially in the gum and teether region. It looks a lot more obvious to me from online pics in the wrist and hands but a lot harder for the teeth and gum in online pics.
Anyone know of an xray machine in the 13th 5th or 1st century? I sure don't.
as far as dating is concerned there is very good evidence from the mandylion and the sudarium to take the shroud all the way back to the 6th century so this makes the forger theory that much more remarkable.
Trancestate
Member
Oh Doug, I wanted to mention this but forgot to do so before. I know I mentioned that im Catholic, but I also forgot to mention that im an inclusivist, which means that although we believe that the only way to the father is through the son we also believe that a person can be saved through just genuine effort to find God, even non Christians. From my reading, the early Christian writers from Justin Martyr onward, many if not most of them were inclusivists as well, and I personally feel that incluisivism speaks best to God's understanding and empathy . I know many from the evangelical side don't agree with this but like I said many of the early Christians were inclusivists, and I do believe that the official Catholic position post Vatican 2 was more strongly clarified as inclusivism.
Almost all people these days heard of the term good Samaritan, but most don't know that this is a biblical story and Samaritans were not just non believers in Judaism and Christianity but were known for their anti Christian Stance in that many Samaritan towns wouldn't even
I was once at a Catholic retreat when I was going through a spiritual crisis about 4 o 5 years back and I was assigned a nun, and one of the questions I had for her was what will happen to my non Catholic and non Christian friends when they die, and thankfully she was a nun that had a more open view and understood the Church's stance on this, but if she had explained the difference between exclusivism and inclusivism to me I don't think I would have fully absorbed the meanings of the 2 to the point of fully understanding them, so she gave me a story of a dream she once had when she was a child.
When she was a child she was having a nightmare and was screaming at the top of her lungs and was woken up by her mom as she was in a cold sweat.
The mom asked "what is wrong my child" the girl responded " mom we got it all wrong, its the Presbyterians that are going to heaven only!!!"
The mom laughed and asked her daughter if this was the kind of God we believed in and loved with all our hearts. The girl immediately understood what her mom meant.
It brought great relief to my heart and told me that my prayers for my muslim, Buddhist, hindu , agnostic and friends from many other worldviews still carried great weight with God.
Even though that retreat was very stressfull to me, ill never forget that Kind Nun who taught me a lot more then I thought I would be learning that weekend. :)
I hope this will help you understand my stance better
Invincibly Ignorant
The Church recognizes that God does not condemn those who are innocently ignorant of the truth about his offer of salvation. Regarding the doctrine in question, the Catechism of the Catholic Church (quoting Vatican II document Lumen Gentium, 16) states:
This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. (CCC 847)
Vatican II document Gaudium Et Spesteaches similarly on the possibility of salvation:
All this holds true not only for Christians, but for all men of good will in whose hearts grace works in an unseen way. For, since Christ died for all men, and since the ultimate vocation of man is in fact one, and divine, we ought to believe that the Holy Spirit in a manner known only to God offers to every man the possibility of being associated with this paschal mystery. (22)
This teaching is consistent with Jesus’ own teaching about those who innocently reject him: "If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin" (Jn 15:22).
But once a person comes to know the truth, he must embrace it or he will be culpable of rejecting it. We see this in Jesus’ words to the Pharisees: "If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains" (Jn 9:41). Paul taught likewise concerning the Gentiles:
When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus. (Rom 2:14-16)
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/what-no-salvation-outside-the-church-means
http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/what-no-salvation-outside-the-church-means
Here is another link that talks about the official church view on this.
Jägermeister
New
Except the Hungarian Pray codex does NOT have a '3way herringbone', unless you want to pretend the interlocking pyramids represents the weave. The codex image also has crosses on the other side, something lacking on the shroud itself. You also have the problem that there is no image of Jesus on the codex shroud, nor is one mentioned in the text. The 4 circles are in a L shape, but the orientation is wrong, considering the other problems, the similarity appears to be a coincidence.
Having read the paper, it is not so excellent. Dr. Rogers paper did not prove the c14 test wrong, it just came up with a different date, an important distinction. This tells us that one of the papers is wrong, not which one. Having read both, it is more likely Roger's paper.
The c14 test followed scientific protocols, such as a clear chain from sample taking to testing. Rogers did not, he even admits his samples were in essence stolen, even though it is hard to see how they could have been from a reading of the c14 paper itself.
There are other problems, such as Rogers claiming the shroud 'could not have become very hot' during a fire in 1532. Not only could he not know that for sure, but his experiment is dependent on knowing the precise temperature for the Arrhenius equation he uses. His work is dependent on a previous paper by Stanley T. Kosiewicz (who he does not list in the references) that is based on a constant temperature. According to a report in 1503, the shroud has been boiled in oil, and 'laundered many times', hardly constant, and this fact is absent from Rogers paper. These boilings would have destroyed vanillin, artificially aging his results.
Xray information? Perhaps you or your source are seeing something you want to see. Even so, you don't need a machine to see how a skeleton looks.
People didn't understand what rigor mortis was more then 700 years ago?
.
The interlocking pyramids are interlocking in the same pattern as the 3way herringbone weave as we can see here. Now maybe u cant see but most, even skeptics can see it. Some like u simply don't want to see it ;)
Next we see the pattern in the Hungarian pray codex
Even AGNOSTIC unbeliever Cambridge traineed historian Thomas De Wesselow agrees that this these are found on the shroud. Ill take his word over yours Jagermeister. Now don't bereate me for taking the word of an art expert over yours ;)
.
We are not even talking about the date Jager, this is what you simply keep ignoring. Rogers found an end to end splice of cotton which was interwoven into regular shroud linen. Rogers had sticky tape samples which he personally took in front of the turin authorities and sturp from all parts of the shroud including image areas over 30 in all and didn't find one spliced cotton anywhere in them. You simply want to see what you are seeing and not the facts. In addition to this Rogers found madder dye in gum Arabica in that area which could have only come from an expert reweave who wanted to dye that area to make it look like the rest of the shroud. Rogers found no madder dye from any other areas of the shroud. Again you simply don't want to see the reality of what rogers found. He wasn't the only one who found it. John L Brown a an expert microscopist also found it when rogers sent him some of the samples that he had, plus 9 other scientists from los Alamos labs confirmed rogers findings.
If you had read both the nature article and the analysis done by statisticians you would have seen that the chi squared number of the 1988 test was 6.4, any number over 6 and its not representative of the whole. The people in charge of the 1988 tests also violated a major protocol by not doing any microchemical tests to make sure that the sample being tested was chemically the same as the rest of the shroud. If you were an honest research jager (and im showing that u are not) you would have known this, and you would have also shown us that ray rogers did in fact do a microchemical analysis of the sample and found that it wasn't chemically the same as the rest of the shroud. All in all 15 protocols were violated which I will post in my next message as they would take up too much space here.
Wow, when someone makes an accusation such as this they usually would have confirmation of facts to show this. Please show me where it says that rogers essentially said they were stolen. I see conspiracy theories flyting all over the place. Pseudo facts that u cant even back up. If you had read rogers previous statements you would have seen that he initially accepted the 1988 results. Hes an agnostic who had no bias (unlike you who has a clear enough bias to allow you to make accusations that you cant even back up. Again posting opinions against expert analysis wont do much for your extreme bias here my friend
Again I will debunk your claim that the 1988 team followed scientific protocols in my next post as I have already shown 2 protocols that they have broken (chi squared and no microchemical analysis)
In actuality Rogers does account for many different factors in the loss of vanillin if you had read the paper and even admit it, and this is why he gave such a wide range of dates, which again your leaving out because it doesn't bolster your case of extreme bias against the shroud. and again yo conveniently failed to note in your post that Rogers even posted that Los Alamos even tested vanillin loss rates at different temperatures from 40 to 100 degrees celcius (the boiling point of oil) and this is what they showed.
http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF
"""
Stanley T. Kosiewicz of
Los Alamos aged samples that contained lignin at 40, 70,
and 100
◦
C for up to 24 months. Comparison of detection
limits among the samples showed the rate of vanillin loss is
very low."""
Jagger now if you believe the shroud is a fake that is your right to do so but don't try to pass off your opinions as science, or you run the risk of being called out and embarrassed by someone who has done their shroud research, who will then expose your extreme emotional bias against the shroud and prove to you that you aren't a true seeker of truth but someone who has an emotional gripe which I believe I have sufficiently shown here so far
Next Time Jagger try reading Rogers whole paper instead of cherry picking parts which you can attack as ambiguous.
Well lets let the pics speak for themselves. This can more easily be seen without the machine but the other parts like the teeth , jaw and left femur need more enhanced pics of the shroud to be used in conjunction with the machine.
What we also notice here is that s look very elongated , too elongated to be considered real fingers, but the amazing part is that the image has been analyzed by forensic experts, anatomists and art experts and they have concluded that the image is anatomically correct. From Robert Buckly, to dame Isabel piczek to the early 20th century agnostic French anatomists Ives delage when he presented his findings to the French academy. the hands clearly look thinner and longer then a regular hand that has flesh attached to it.
As far as why a machine is needed to see the rest it would to be in 3d and a device would be needed to plot the points
http://people.duke.edu/~adw2/shroud/whanger.htm
""""Studies on the Shroud of Turin by Dr. Alan and Mrs. Mary Whanger have been underway in Durham, North Carolina since 1979. Dr. Whanger is Professor Emeritus at Duke University Medical Center and is skilled in photography and video. The Whangers were challenged to find a method of performing "exacting comparisons" between the face of the Man of the Shroud and the faces of early icons and other images. In 1981, they developed a polarized image overlay technique in which two images are projected one on top of the other and exactly aligned onto the same screen through polarizing filters at right angles one to the other. When viewed through a third rotating polarized filter, the two images fade one into the other allowing detailed observation and analysis of the congruencies, similarities, and dissimilarities of the two images. This method reveals that the Shroud face image was used extensively and accurately as the basis of artistic depictions of Jesus as early as the 3rd Century and consistently from the 6th Century onward""""
"""Examination of a three dimensional enhancement of the face reveals the underlying skeletal structures, including the eye sockets, nasal bones, sinuses, and about 20 teeth, showing that the Shroud image is in part an autoradiograph."""
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n37part3.pdf
""""For many years Shroud researchers have been puzzled by the striking `X-ray appearance of
certain features of the Shroud. In particular there seems a very skeletal appearance to the hands,
as has been observed by, among others, Dr. Giles Carter and Dr. John Jackson in the U.S.A., and
Dr. Allan Mills of Leicester University here in the U.K.
Now Dr. Alan Whanger, Professor Emeritus of the Duke University Medical Center in Durham,
North Carolina, together with his wife Mary, both enthusiastic researchers on the Shroud since
1979, have taken the observation a step further. They have recently produced striking threedimensional enhancements of the Shroud images by superimposing the positive and negative
photographs, and moving them slightly out of vertical alignment. The effect of this is to reveal
more detail than can normally be seen in a single photograph. And when they studied a 3-D
enhancement of the Shroud hands, to their astonishment images of the bones of the fingers, the
hands and the wrists showed up with quite unexpected clarity. Using their Polarized Overlay
Technique, they then compared the 3D enhancements with X-rays of hands and a skull, finding
what they call an autoradiograph, that is, an image derived from X-rays coming out from every
part of the body to show up those parts of the skeletal system fairly close to the surface.
According to a press release issued by Dr. Alan Whanger on 29 March:
Even the individual wrist bones can be identified, and it is plain where the nail went
through the wrist. The eye sockets, the nasal bones, the sinuses and about 20 teeth
accurate in detail including the roots can be rather clearly seen. These findings have been
reviewed by a number of physicians, including three professors of radiology [italics mine
- Ed.], who all immediately agreed that this shows an autoradiograph. ... These new
detailed images show clearly that the reason for the appearance of the very long fingers
and of the wide eyes is the underlying skeletal image.""""""
The elongated looking fingers canalso be seen on the Hungarian pray codex as well which u conveniently ignored and this would be how medieval artists would depict it as agnostic cambridge trained art historian Thomas de wesselow said in his book the sign.
Now Jagermeister, I can understand an honest seeker looking at the evidence in an honest way and saying "well I still need more" but you are looking at clear evidence and saying "that's not what is there" which tells me that instead of not believing the shroud could be authentic, you don't want to believe that its authentic, and there is a major difference between the 2 views.