I’m sure this will be a shock to you all, but it seems the Shroud of Turin is not a magic xerox of the risen Jesus. An Italian scientist claims he has reproduced the technique:
An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.
The shroud, measuring 14 feet, 4 inches by 3 feet, 7 inches (4.4 by 1.2 metres) bears the image, eerily reversed like a photographic negative, of a crucified man some believers say is Christ.
“We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud,” Luigi Garlaschelli, who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday….
Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.
But scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth. Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages.
They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A mask was used for the face.
The pigment was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries.
There’s more information about it here. The only thing I’m surprised about is that someone didn’t do it earlier.
Oh wait… they did.
Oh come on! You mean they didn’t know that the “original” was a photocopy?
They did a radio carbon date of the shroud in the 70s. It was made in the middle ages. Clearly a forgery but people don’t give a crap.
Of course they don’t give a crap! Those that believe the shroud is real also believe the Earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs and humans lived together. No amount of evidence to the contrary will sway them, they have FAITH!
I don’t think there is any direct connection between belief in the shroud as a holy relic and being a YEC.
Other than the fact that they are equally ridiculous.
The Shroud is a Catholic relic, and the only people who really care about its authenticity are Catholics. Very few Catholics are YECs. Assuming that all crazy religionists hold all crazy religious beliefs is just foolish.
Duh…
Maybe next they can look into the Loch Ness Monster
The Italian group think that they may have been able to recreate the Shroud of Turin. Maybe they have? But, I’d love for them to try and recreate the coffee stained image of the Virgin Mary I personally have. A few photos of the image can be found here on Flickr. http://www.flickr.com/photos/7690119@N03/sets/72157617453203072/detail/
I see brown.
I created an image very similar to that with some toilet paper.
To me the image looks more like an old man than any female virgin.
Shorter Dan:
“I see dead people!”
You know, a good washing up liquid will remove stubborn stains. If the stain is still there after washing the glass, then maybe it’s a miracle. Or maybe you need better washing up liquid.
“…Proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.”
It does nothing of the sort. It proves that there is a rational explanation, and increases our (already very high) confidence that it was a fake, but honestly, even if you found papers in a mediaeval archive that said “I’ve just made a nice shroud that looks like it’s got the face of jesus on it, I’m just going to send it to Turin to see what they make of it”, it wouldn’t “prove definitively” that the Turin shroud is a mediaeval fake.
Sorry, I appear to be ranty today.
The important thing to know about this research is funded by atheists. Or so says the National Catholic Register.
This seems like an attempt by the catholics to just whine. I wonder how much money they spend trying to prove the so called artifacts as real? LOL got to love them though.
That article also falsely states, “Moreover, Church authorities continue to make the shroud available to scientists in order to assess its possible authenticity with the best means available.” The church seemed to lose interest in scientific testing after the radioisotope dating didn’t turn out like they wanted. Requests for samples for more dating (to counter claims of poor sampling) have been denied.
I think what would be great is if, instead of trying to disprove a hoax over and over again, they perfected the method for mass production, so we could all have one. I’m sure some people would miss the point, but I think I would buy one. This seems like the perfect beach blanket or shower curtain kind of thing, slipcovers for your divan or whatever.
the Church is missing out on an opportunity to make millions or even billions of dollars! the merchandising possibilities are nearly endless.
The original xy Are you being ironic? I expect you are, but you are perhaps being too subtle. Of course, we all know the The True Church (TM) has never missed out on a marketing opportunity.
I used to revel in the opportunity to engage in reductio ad absurdum with believers; especially fundies. Regardless of the ironic attempts to preface the inevitable and unassailable “it all comes down to faith” argument with competing theory blathering, all my brain registers is, “people rode dinosaurs,” or “the world is flat,” and I just smile politely as I would when a child is proud of colouring inside the lines for the first time.
And nothing has solidified my treatment of religion-based conversation more than the following quote:
I want to see a photo of what Garlaschelli has come up with. Any links?
Found 1 side by side link:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1218457/Shroud-Turin-replica-proves-medieval-techniques-make-relic-say-scientists.html
Let’s check and see if this guy was good enough to
1) put the image of coins on his eyes, which scientist did realize until a few years ago.
2) get pollen that was found on the shroud that only comes from the middle east
3) and I wonder if NASA’s 3D analyzer will produce the same result on his reproduction
Pretty interesting someone would know to do an inverse image before the camera and film exposure was invented
Let’s check and see if this guy was good enough to
1) put the image of coins on his eyes, which scientist didn’t realize until a few years ago.
2) get pollen that was found on the shroud that is indigenous to that area
3) and I wonder if NASA’s 3D analyzer will produce the same result on his reproduction
Pretty interesting someone would know to do an inverse image before the camera and film exposure was invented
Despite all of your ignorance, it has been proven that the carbon testing was invalid. Why? Because the sample that was tested contained new and old threads woven together. After the shroud was damaged by fire, parts were rewoven. also, if the image on the shroud was created by pigment then how come there are NO TRACES WHAT SO EVER of any kind of intentional pigmentation? Even after wearing off, there would have been some traces of pigment chemically.Also, the image on the shroud was a a photo negative, meaning, that if a person took a picture of it, it would be photo positive. The shroud, when put in the computer, became a 3 dimensional image.this can’t be reproduced by pigment and an oven.
Okay. So? This shroud hardly proves any diety exists.
Your comment about taking pictures of negatives turns them into is so stupid I don’t even have a retort.
I imagine you’d have a pretty messed up computer if you put this shroud into it.
Sorry, that should be “taking pictures of negatives turns them into positives.”
Sean, you’re an idiot. Repeating the lies that some Catholic
pederastpriest has spouted at you doesn’t make them true and it doesn’t give you any credibility. The Turin Shroud is a Medieval fake. It just doesn’t stand up to modern investigations.I hope you are not saying that Masks and Busts hadn’t been invented yet.
Idiot.
And photoshop. It is awesome what a computer can do.
Thank you for your analysis. however, I got my research.om real independent scientists, not those hired by atheists. Modern science has concluded that the carbon dating was inaccurate. Do the research on your own. Stop listening to atheists with an agenda.there are flaws with the recreation. For instance, when The face of the shroud is put through a computer is creates a 3d image. It’s more like a photograph scorched on the cloth than a painting. It very accurately.depicts a human face. Also, the recreator said that he put what appeared to be blood on the cloth AFTER HE PUT THE IMAGE ON.However, the shroud was soaked with blood before The Image was put on. on the shroud, there is no image beneath the blood, as there would be if it were put on afterwards. Also, what appears to blood on the shroud IS BLOOD. it is human blood that contains a chemical indicative of someone who has been severely scourged. Maybe you should accept the findings of modern scientists. This is a helpful link that might introduce you to reality.
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2009/10/italian-scientist-says-he-has.html
Also the shroud lacks discretionality. All works of art have discretionality.
I’m sorry,I meant to put that it lacks DIRECTIONALITY
You already have enough “directionality”.
That’s actually untrue – in theory, all handwriting also posesses directionality, but mine doesn’t. I have dyspraxia which manifests as in part as classic dysgraphia. Nothing I draw, paint or write has any directionality. I’m not actually convinced that you know what the word means, but there we go.
I am really surprised that it means anything at all.
Anyway… printed images also lack directionality.
Oh dear:
I think what the shroud lacks is authenticity.
It contains the usual. Reality? That picture of “thick yarn/thin yarn,” I don’t see any differences being pointed out.
“It is further evidence of the Divine origin of the Shroud and therefore its providential protection, that there have been many attempts and events that could have destroyed the Shroud, but it has outlasted them all:”
That’s only evidence that people believe it is divine enough to need to be saved.
“So Garlaschelli’s is just the latest in a long line of anti-Christian (and I assume ultimately Satanic) attempts to destroy the Shroud!”
Ultimately Satanic?
If the author of that blog wanted to introduce people to reality, he has to be introduced to it first.
-discretionality > directionality – I still don’t know what you mean.
It’s ok, neither does he.
Sorry Sean, but if even the Vatican don’t endorse the shroud (credulous as they are), then why on Earth do you think you’re going to convince anybody here? I’ve looked at the issue in detail. I’ve read the articles. I’ve read the points and counterpoints. I know the controversy over the radio-carbon dating. In short, I know this debate at least as well as you, and I have concluded: The shroud is a fake.
The Vatican must be full of atheists.
The Vatican doesn’t endorse it? Last I heard they were still charging people to see it.
When did knowing something is fake ever stopped the Vatican from using it if they taught it will help them squeeze some extra cash out of the flock.
See for exampe the first “miracle” attributed to mother Teresa – the curing of a woman in India’s stomach cancer after she (claims she) ate a wafer bearing Mother Teresa’s image. The woman’s estranged husband (who paid for her surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy) is not thrilled that a dead nun is getting credit for the work of a lot of expensive doctors, but the Vatican are ignoring him.
Here is another “miracle” by that old merchant of suffering (a segment from the Hitchens documentary Hell’s angel, the relevant segment is between 2:00 and 4:00).
No, the Vatican refuses to comment on its authenticity one way or the other.
No, actually it doesn’t.
I particularly liked this paragraph -
“If Jesus had the proportions of the image in the shroud, then he was a severely deformed and pathological person who would have cut a shocking figure as he walked down the streets and paths of the Holy Land. Exceptionally tall for his time and place, his rather narrow head was so shrunken and low browed that it would have indicated a unique form of hypocephaly so serious that it would have impaired his mental function, leaving his intellectual performance similar to that of protohuman. Overly long arms would have hung at his sides, with one exceptionally elongated, the other less so because of an atrophied lower arm. It is hard to see how such bizarre attributes would have not been mentioned in an account of his life, assuming anyone bothered to record it considering the circumstances. Because the proportions of the shroud image are essentially impossible, the figure cannot represent that of an actual person.”
Feel free to disagree with me. I respect disagreement. However, please feel free to educate yourselves on the facts from credible scientists. http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2009/10/italian-scientist-says-he-has.html. this link pLease visit this link. BTW, the Vatican dissociated itself with the shroud after the carbon dating tests which have since been invalidated.
Pass.
I smell a argument from supposed authority and a rickroll.
I’d rather be rickrolled.
“Credible scientists” who just happen to be Christian apologists…very unbiased I’m sure.
The stubborn ignorance is strong with this one.
you probably didn’t take the time to review the link If you think they are all Christian apologists. Its also funny because this scientist who recreated the shroud was actually hired by an atheist/agnostic group.
So really, it looks like the atheists have an agenda: prove the Christians wrong, even if your method don’t match up to the know reality.
Why should we try to prove you godbots wrong, when you do such a fabulous job of it all on your own?
How come we are the only ones that have “agendas”? The shroud was created as a fraud, which the church has been exploiting for centuries, but we “have an agenda”. Really?
Sean, did you not read other replies before you posted the link as if nobody saw it the first time? You did not respond to my post.
Found at the link, this quote.
“So Garlaschelli’s is just the latest in a long line of anti-Christian (and I assume ultimately Satanic) attempts to destroy the Shroud!”
I did take the time to look at the link and I posted some of the red flags for Christian apologetics that I found. Already. You chose to ignore. Don’t be a douche, ‘k? What kind of legitimate scientist would write crap like this in a scientific article?