|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 10, 6:53 pm, " wrote:
On Jan 10, 5:40 pm, tadchem wrote: On Jan 10, 2:51 pm, (Anonymous) wrote: On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, wrote: The Holy Shroud in Turin is and remains a riddle -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I think that the only mystery remaining about the Shroud of Turin is *Why* do antichrists (Atheists, CHRINOs, ad nauseam) refuse to accept the incontrovertible evidence that this particular artifact is the _actual_ shroud that the horribly beaten and crucified dead physical body of Jesus Christ was wrapped in for more than seventy- two contiguous hours before He physically resurrected, and neatly folded up the cloth, and left it in the tomb for mortals to find? The other side of the question is "why do the True Believers insist on accepting a medieval piece of religious art as some magically produced artifact with its own miraculous powers that for some inscrutable reason came into existence and continues to exist outside of the 'Divine Order' of the 'perfect creation' completed on the 6th Day by the Creators work?" In other words, why are there miracles in a perfect world? Either the world is not perfect, or there are no miracles. You cannot eat your cake and still have it. Armageddon Cometh, Armageddon came and went. It ended with the siege of Masada. Your Saviour's body was dismembered in a cave on the south side of the citadel and parts were cast to the rocks below, insuring that He will never again be resurrected. Evil won. Deal with it. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA Tom, I don't know about the dismemberment of the body, but what I do know is that the Shroud of Turin was once made available for scientific analysis, and that the stains on it were positively identified as artist's pigments. Not that I believe what I see on TV, but there was a television program on the subject. A strong faith helps some people through difficult times, and often tends to persuade others from destructive, animal like, impulsive behavior, but if their faith hinges on a artist pigment stained rag, then their faith seems to me to be rather superficial. Harry C. i think you must be confused as to what the results of the scientific analysis were... There were pigments on the shroud, but not to form the image of the body, who was obviously genuinely crucified, whipped and so on, to produce 'the effect'... And then it was photographed. The Shroud of Turin is the oldest existing photograph. The clincher for this argument is the foreshortened legs, suggesting that the pinhole lens was about level with the bodies chest. Also: The gap at the top of the head, which should have been continuous if it had been laid around/over the body, means that the body was simply flipped over, and another exposure was taken. Just another case of where some unknown ( Certainly NOT Leonardo ) genius, developed a remarkable technology, and took it to the grave with him. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 12, 5:13*am, Benj wrote:
On Jan 11, 4:48 pm, " wrote: On Jan 11, 7:49 am, eddie wrote: I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. I didn't post about carbon dating, but IIRC the Shroud was carbon dated to a period well beyond the lifetime of Christ. My point was simply that the stains on the Shroud analyzed as artists' pigments, not organic residue. I don't know where you got this information. IIRC there were no artist's pigments found either as the "blood" or the image itself. *Or are you referring to some other stains? *The "image" which was long regarded as a painted fake, was clearly found to be created by a yellowing of the cloth fibers. *No pigment of any kind was found. *The "blood" stains were also found to be in such forensic detail that no artist of the period could have ever had the knowledge to "paint" them. *The carbon dating was found not be to the period of the death of Yeshua (Jesus) but others have argued that bacteria over time create contamination that invalidates the process. All of this leads to a conclusion that there can't be a quick dismissal of this shroud as an "artistic" creation. There seem to be two leading theories that could make some sense. One is that the shroud is what it purports to be and the image is the result of radiation at the time of the "resurection" be it re-animation energies or a UFO tractor beam or whatever your favorite idea is. The other competing theory is the idea that Leonardo DaVinci faked the shroud for the Church using a dead body, sunlight and the world's first photographic setup. Someone (British) wrote a book proposing that theory and it was quite detailed. Benj Benj, no need for a UFO beam was required, since the lab reuslts have been identified as simply artist's pigments. All you have to do to find an explanation for the stains on the Shroud of Truing is to Google "shroud artist pigments" and look for the name McCrone. I believe that the Vatican agrees with these findings. Harry C. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 12, 6:26 pm, The Translucent Amoebae
wrote: On Jan 10, 6:53 pm, " wrote: On Jan 10, 5:40 pm, tadchem wrote: On Jan 10, 2:51 pm, (Anonymous) wrote: On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, wrote: The Holy Shroud in Turin is and remains a riddle -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I think that the only mystery remaining about the Shroud of Turin is *Why* do antichrists (Atheists, CHRINOs, ad nauseam) refuse to accept the incontrovertible evidence that this particular artifact is the _actual_ shroud that the horribly beaten and crucified dead physical body of Jesus Christ was wrapped in for more than seventy- two contiguous hours before He physically resurrected, and neatly folded up the cloth, and left it in the tomb for mortals to find? The other side of the question is "why do the True Believers insist on accepting a medieval piece of religious art as some magically produced artifact with its own miraculous powers that for some inscrutable reason came into existence and continues to exist outside of the 'Divine Order' of the 'perfect creation' completed on the 6th Day by the Creators work?" In other words, why are there miracles in a perfect world? Either the world is not perfect, or there are no miracles. You cannot eat your cake and still have it. Armageddon Cometh, Armageddon came and went. It ended with the siege of Masada. Your Saviour's body was dismembered in a cave on the south side of the citadel and parts were cast to the rocks below, insuring that He will never again be resurrected. Evil won. Deal with it. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA Tom, I don't know about the dismemberment of the body, but what I do know is that the Shroud of Turin was once made available for scientific analysis, and that the stains on it were positively identified as artist's pigments. Not that I believe what I see on TV, but there was a television program on the subject. A strong faith helps some people through difficult times, and often tends to persuade others from destructive, animal like, impulsive behavior, but if their faith hinges on a artist pigment stained rag, then their faith seems to me to be rather superficial. Harry C. i think you must be confused as to what the results of the scientific analysis were... There were pigments on the shroud, but not to form the image of the body, who was obviously genuinely crucified, whipped and so on, to produce 'the effect'... And then it was photographed. The Shroud of Turin is the oldest existing photograph. The chemistry of hematite, vermilion, and collagen does not permit the production of photosensitive materials. The clincher for this argument is the foreshortened legs, suggesting that the pinhole lens was about level with the bodies chest. That does not wash with the fact that one leg was significantly shorter than the other. If you are right, Jesus was a cripple. If science is right, the shroud was painted by an artist who was not well- schooled in anatomy. In the mid-14th century (before the Rennaisance) there were no Western artists well-schooled in anatomy. Here is an fun little game to play. Measure the distance from the outside corner of one eye, across that eye and the bridge of the nose and then the other eye to the far corner. The distance between the outer corners of my eyes is about 4.5 inches (11 cm). The distance between my pupils is 3.5 inches. The distance from my right pupil to the center of my ear hole is about 5 inches. If I were to cover my face with ink and plant it into a white towel, the distance from the center of the impression of my left eye to the center of the impression of my left ear would be about 5 inches, much larger than the distance between my pupils. Try the same with the Shroud's image, and you will see that the shroud was off the head well past the hair covering the ears, long before it should have been: http://www.shroudforum.com/exhibit/images/face.jpg Either (1) the Shroud image was NOT made by wrapping the shroud around a real human head (totally invalidating the very concept of a burial shroud), or (2) Jesus' head has the proportions of a cardboard cutout with much breadth and very little depth. Also: The gap at the top of the head, which should have been continuous if it had been laid around/over the body, means that the body was simply flipped over, and another exposure was taken. Or it means that the artist worked on one side at a time. Just another case of where some unknown ( Certainly NOT Leonardo ) genius, developed a remarkable technology, and took it to the grave with him. That would be an impossible technology, but then you haven't examined the photomicrographs, have you. To produce a photograph, the photosensitive chemicals must first be coated *uniformly* over the plate. No lumps. This is not true of the Shroud. You are postulating something equivalent to "I don't know how it could be done, therefore it must have been a miracle. Once I believe it is a miracle, it must be physically impossible. Since I want to believe in miracles, whenever anybody tries to give me a non-miraculous explanation, I must believe they are wrong." You seem to fail to recognize that your "photography" rationalization also amounts to claim that the Shroud is not an actual burial shroud in the sense of having been used to wrap a body, but merely a primitive imaging system which had no physical contact with the sunject. The spirit of Erich von Däniken lives in you. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 12, 6:11 pm, tadchem wrote:
On Jan 12, 6:26 pm, The Translucent Amoebae wrote: On Jan 10, 6:53 pm, " wrote: On Jan 10, 5:40 pm, tadche...ich von Däniken lives in you. Tom Davidson Richmond, VA i suspect that most people have a problem with the photographic postulate because they think, without knowing anything about photography, that it's a very complicated technology that was only made available by means of highly advanced chemical processes in the 20th Century. You could take an apple, very thoroughly grind it up, soak a finely woven cloth in this soup, and you have a perfectly viable photographic film. Fixing it; Or changing the chemistry of it, after the exposure is a slightly more tricky trick, and i'm not sure how you'd do with an apple based emulsion...??? But we're talking here about a genius with some alchemical background, and 'The Trick' that he either stumbled across by carefully observing something completely unrelated, or by means of a discovery long sought after...??? The Camera on the other hand, had already been around for a few hundred years... WITHOUT FILM...!!! Why would anyone make and popularize a camera without film...??? Because back then, ( 15th Cen ) it was known as a Camera Obscura, or Camera Lucida, which was basically a dark room or box with a dark cloth draped over on side; with a pinhole lens, or an actual primative lens on the other end. It was used by people that simply found the effect of a very dimly projected image fascinating, or by artists that wanted to make better pictures. So there you have it; Easily obtainable film, a camera that's been around for years & years, and the only missing two bits are a through knowledge of how a crucified body should look, and the emulsion fixative. Not extremely impossible mysteries. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 12, 4:27 pm, " wrote:
On Jan 12, 5:13 am, Benj wrote: On Jan 11, 4:48 pm, " wrote: On Jan 11, 7:49 am, eddie wrote: I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. I didn't post about carbon dating, but IIRC the Shroud was carbon dated to a period well beyond the lifetime of Christ. My point was simply that the stains on the Shroud analyzed as artists' pigments, not organic residue. I don't know where you got this information. IIRC there were no artist's pigments found either as the "blood" or the image itself. Or are you referring to some other stains? The "image" which was long regarded as a painted fake, was clearly found to be created by a yellowing of the cloth fibers. No pigment of any kind was found. The "blood" stains were also found to be in such forensic detail that no artist of the period could have ever had the knowledge to "paint" them. The carbon dating was found not be to the period of the death of Yeshua (Jesus) but others have argued that bacteria over time create contamination that invalidates the process. All of this leads to a conclusion that there can't be a quick dismissal of this shroud as an "artistic" creation. There seem to be two leading theories that could make some sense. One is that the shroud is what it purports to be and the image is the result of radiation at the time of the "resurection" be it re-animation energies or a UFO tractor beam or whatever your favorite idea is. The other competing theory is the idea that Leonardo DaVinci faked the shroud for the Church using a dead body, sunlight and the world's first photographic setup. Someone (British) wrote a book proposing that theory and it was quite detailed. Benj Benj, no need for a UFO beam was required, since the lab reuslts have been identified as simply artist's pigments. All you have to do to find an explanation for the stains on the Shroud of Truing is to Google "shroud artist pigments" and look for the name McCrone. I believe that the Vatican agrees with these findings. Harry C. This evidence, by your own source, is refuted in the next paragraph. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 12, 12:32 am, Benj wrote:
On Jan 11, 8:21 pm, Uncle Al wrote: " wrote: On Jan 11, 7:49 am, eddie wrote: Harry C, I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. [snip crap] And "uncle Al" begins his expounding that has NOTHING to do with Carbon Dating. Of course most of his rants have nothing to do with the subject at hand. 1) A sheet is a zero-curvature Euclidean plane. Wrong. It falls and curves over the face. 2) A caucasoid face is a positve curvature elliptic surface Jargon-filled wordyness, but true. 3) An elliptic surface (e.g., the Earth or Jesus H. ****ing Christ's face) cannot be projected upon a Euclidean plane (e.g., a paper map or a linen sheet) without distortion. Cartography, asshole. The image projected on the shroud DOES have distortion. It differs significantly from a photograph. The general theory is that the intensity of the image is related to the distance of the cloth to the body (more image than just face). Punctuated by gratuitous ad hominem. 4) The Shroud of Turin is a crappy fraud. Ah here we go: "Proof by assertion!" Works for me every time! Make your own Shroud of Uncle AL: 1) Flat plaster bas relief sculpture of a face. If you are a keener, deeply sculpt a pizza stone. 2) Get yourself a flat cotton sheet or, better, a thicker flat cotton cloth. Wool will stink; polymer will melt. 3) Heat the bas relief sculpture not above 233 C. 4) Lay down the flat cotton cloth ad sung until it chars a bit. 5) There ya go, asshole - the Shroud of Uncle Al, complete with photographic reversal. Except that there will be a different temperature (and burn rate) between the part of the relief TOUCHING the cloth and the part just radiating to it. I guess you never tried your own experiment, right? Moron. Uncle Al says, "Never underestimate assholiness of large numbers of stupid people." Say, wait a minute. You are one of those Joos, right? Don't you guys have a vested interest in discrediting any and all stories about this particular Messiah? Why? He was just another Joo. Stuart |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 10, 9:53*pm, " wrote:
Tom, I don't know about the dismemberment of the body, but what I do know is that the Shroud of Turin was once made available for scientific analysis, and that the stains on it were positively identified as artist's pigments. Not that I believe what I see on TV, but there was a television program on the subject. Yeah; either the "blood" was painted on with iron oxide pigment, or else Jesus had one serious case of hemochomatosis. Of course, perhaps that's the key to divinity; kind of like midichlorians; you need to move a lot of oxygen to your physical manifestation, if you're going to do miracles. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 11, 7:49*am, eddie wrote:
Harry C, I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. say what? |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
On Jan 11, 4:48*pm, " wrote:
On Jan 11, 7:49*am, eddie wrote: Harry C, I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. I didn't post about carbon dating, but IIRC the Shroud was carbon dated to a period well beyond the lifetime of Christ. My point was simply that the stains on the Shroud analyzed as artists' pigments, not organic residue. I really don't care either way, and tend to regard the legend of Christ equal in credibility of the Morman tale related to Joseph Smith and Hill Cumorah. Both tales are beautiful and inspirational legends, but legends that have historically brought out both the best and the worst in men. I personally tend to govern my life based on the Old Testament's 10 Commandments, and my charities based on the New Testament. Both appeal to my sense of logic. You could do worse. Harry C. well, that brings up the interesting question: "Hypothetically, if it did turn out that the Shroud were in fact a medieval painting, would that then destroy your faith in Jesus?" I expect almost nobody would say yes. So, why the huge debate as though it were some sort of fundamental requirement of the entire Christian religion that it be in fact the actual Shroud, despite a lot of evidence to the contrary? |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
The mystery of the Holy Shroud
Stuart wrote:
On Jan 12, 12:32 am, Benj wrote: On Jan 11, 8:21 pm, Uncle Al wrote: " wrote: On Jan 11, 7:49 am, eddie wrote: Harry C, I've read a little on the subject from one scientist who has done some research on it....bacteria do produce a plastic substance which has been found to mess up the carbon dating. [snip crap] And "uncle Al" begins his expounding that has NOTHING to do with Carbon Dating. Of course most of his rants have nothing to do with the subject at hand. 1) A sheet is a zero-curvature Euclidean plane. Wrong. It falls and curves over the face. Tell it to a cartographer, you uneducated lout. Euclidean plane: 1) Sum of interior angles of a triangle = 180 degrees exactly. 2) One line can be drawn through a point not on a reference line parallel to that reference line. 3) Ratio of circle circumference to diameter = pi exactly. Elliptic plane: 1) Sum of interior angles of a triangle is *always greater* than 180 degrees. Largst sum possible is 540 degrees. 2) *No* line can be drawn through a point not on a reference line parallel to that reference line. 3) Ratio of circle circumference to diameter is always *less* than pi. NO FIGURE ON AN ELLIPTIC PLANE (a curved face) CAN BE PROJECTED ONTO A EUCLIDEAN PLANE (a flat linen sheet) WITHOUT DISTORTION. The undistorted image on the Shroud of Turin is a geometric impossibility - it is a cheap fake. That it can be trivially, exactly reproduced with a sculpted flat plaster slab, a cotton sheet, and an oven confirms its fraud. [snip rest of irrational crap] -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The mystery of the Holy Shroud | Anonymous[_7_] | Astronomy Misc | 49 | January 26th 08 09:44 AM |
Gemini Sensor Launch Shroud? | surfduke | History | 15 | February 8th 07 09:57 PM |
The Holy Shroud | gacrux | Misc | 0 | January 24th 05 06:35 AM |
Cassini Peeks Below Cloud Shroud Around Titan | Ron | News | 0 | October 28th 04 06:25 AM |
Easter - The Holy Shroud and His Mystery | crescinilorenzo | Amateur Astronomy | 1 | March 15th 04 06:29 PM |