Shroud of Turin proven genuine by REAL science

RufusAtticus · #21 29th September 2002, 09:56 PM

Originally posted by VOW
-The image is of a crucified man
-All wounds on the image correspond to those of Christ
-The image is NOT painted on. It appears to be scorched into only the outer layer of the threads.

The problem with these is that the image is not accurate. The face on the shroud could only have been produced if the body was flattened. Take a real, 3-D head, put paint on it, and wrap a sheet around it. Then take the sheet off. The image you get is not the same as the one on the shroud.

Man this is hard to explain without pictures. I'll try to did some up.

Pete Harcoff · #22 29th September 2002, 10:23 PM

Originally posted by RCC
See: How accurate is Carbon-14 dating?
http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c007.html

I love this:

"Also, the Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance. The flood buried a huge amount of carbon, which became coal, oil, etc., lowering the total 12C in the biosphere (including the atmosphere -- plants regrowing after the flood absorb CO2, which is not replaced by the decay of the buried vegetation). Total 14C is also proportionately lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12C, 14C is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels (it comes from nitrogen). Therefore, the 14C/12C ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now.

Unless this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.

Creationist researchers have suggested that dates of 35,000 - 45,000 years should be re-calibrated to the biblical date of the flood.[6] Such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating -- for example, very discordant "dates" for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from Alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated."

I can imagine a bunch of scientists going, "Silly me! I forgot to compensate for this 4000 yo global flood, for which we have no evidence that it actually took place."

RCC, do you honestly believe that scientists the world over would rely on such a method for dating relics of the past if it were so easily proven flawed? Do you seriously believe that?

TheBear · #23 30th September 2002, 02:24 AM

Well, for starters, the cloth was exposed to a fire a couple of hundred years ago. Parts of the cloth were even burned. And you'll find that alone can skew the results of C-14 dating.

VOW,

Please describe in detail the temperature the shroud was exposed to. Was the entire shroud burnt, or just portions of it? If there were un-burnt pieces of the shroud, why weren't they used in the C-14 method? At what temperature do the C-14 results begin to get skewed? Up to what point can you heat organic material and still have accurate C-14 results? How does the margine of error change, and at what tempratures?

Thanks,
John

RufusAtticus · #24 30th September 2002, 03:25 AM

How does scorching affect C-14 dating? An explaination would be helpful.

armageddonman · #25 30th September 2002, 05:37 AM

This should help.

 

http://www.mcri.org/Shroud.html

Brian45 · #26 30th September 2002, 05:48 AM

All the photo's of the shroud of turin that I have seen show a mans face , and that man having long hair , I believe the jews never wore long hair .

 

1 Corinthians 11

Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?

 

I'm sorry if this offends anyone  ,  it's not my intention .

Chris†opher Paul · #27 30th September 2002, 09:10 AM

ol this hole post is a joke.

What is a hole post?

Anyway, the C14 tests have been clearly refuted due to the organic growth on the linen and the fact that the Shroud was in at least two fires.

Similiar tests on mummy wraps from around 1000 BC yielded dates of around 300AD

Obviously, you cant use C14 to date this type of material.

The Shroud has been shown to not be a hoax, but hasnt been proven to be Jesus burial cloth. *shrug* I believe that it is, given all of the research I have done on it.

Chris†opher Paul · #28 30th September 2002, 10:09 AM

The problem with these is that the image is not accurate. The face on the shroud could only have been produced if the body was flattened. Take a real, 3-D head, put paint on it, and wrap a sheet around it. Then take the sheet off. The image you get is not the same as the one on the shroud.

First, the Shroud wasn't wrapped. It was hastily drapped over Jesus, since Joseph of Arimetha wanted to finish the work before the Sabbath.

Second, there IS a distortion of the image. It looks wider than it should be if it were a painting. Look at my avatar...that is an artists depiction of the Shroud face with real proportions.  The Shroud image is wider and slightly distored, just like it would be on a real 3D face.

The image has 3D properties, which can not be painted, even to this day.

The image was most likely produced from a radiation "burn" similiar to the images found on walls of people that were in Hiroshima after the bomb hit their city.

Chris†opher Paul · #29 30th September 2002, 10:12 AM

Originally posted by Brian45
All the photo's of the shroud of turin that I have seen show a mans face , and that man having long hair , I believe the jews never wore long hair .

 

1 Corinthians 11

Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?

 

I'm sorry if this offends anyone  ,  it's not my intention .

What is "long?"  The Shroud image has shoulder length hair.  Besides, since when did Jesus worry about rocking the boat of Jewish tradition?

TheBear · #30 30th September 2002, 10:24 AM

Thanks for the link, armageddonman.

From the McCrone Research Institute in Chicago:

"The carbon-dating results from three different internationally known laboratories agreed well with his date: 1355 by microscopy and 1325 by C-14 dating. The suggestion that the 1532 Chambery fire changed the date of the cloth is ludicrous. Samples for C-dating are routinely and completely burned to CO2 as part of a well-tested purification procedure. The suggestions that modern biological contaminants were sufficient to modernize the date are also ridiculous. A weight of 20th century carbon equaling nearly two times the weight of the Shroud carbon itself would be required to change a 1st century date to the 14th century. Besides this, the linen cloth samples were very carefully cleaned before analysis at each of the C-dating laboratories.
Experimental details on the tests carried out at McCrone Associates or the McCrone Research Institute are available in five papers published in three different peer-reviewed journal articles: Microscope 1980, 28, 105, 115; 1981, 29, 19; Wiener Berichte uber Naturwissenschaft in der Kunst 1987/1988, 4/5, 50 and Acc. Chem. Res. 1990, 23, 77-83.
Conclusion:
The "Shroud" is a beautiful painting created about 1355 for a new church in need of a pilgrim-attracting relic."