Shroud of Turin proven genuine by REAL science

RufusAtticus · #81 30th September 2002, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by VOW
However, if a LIVING ORGANISM is present on the surface of the cloth, those particular live forms are still ingesting carbon, in the fixed ratio of C-12 to C-14. Therefore, the sample will contain more C-14 than it would if it contained just the linen alone.

Actually it depends on the source of the carbon. If the microorganisms are using the linen as a carbon sourse, then it is not going to make a difference.

RufusAtticus · #82 30th September 2002, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by s0uljah
This article was published in 3 parts in The Glyph, the journal of The Archaeological Institute of America, San Diego, Vol 1, No. 10 (Sept 1997); No. 11 (Dec 1977); No. 12 (March 1998).

That's rather funny since the shroud dating did come out until 1989.

Edited to Add:

Okay the middle date is 1997. (Thanx, PH)

I looked up the reference and found that it didn't answer my question.

Souljah,

I want to know where Mattingly's & Garza-Vermes's work, which you referenced to, has been published.

Pete Harcoff · #83 30th September 2002, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by RufusAtticus
That's rather funny since the shroud dating did come out until 1989.

Uh, I think the middle date was supposed to be "1997", not "1977".

RufusAtticus · #84 30th September 2002, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by s0uljah
Here is what a forger had to do:

. . . .

If the Shroud of Turin is a forgery of the 14th century, as the radiocarbonists claim, and not a genuine artifact of the 1st century, all of these qualities of the purported medieval "forger" must be accepted. If the Shroud was "forged" it would have to have been painted.

Please provide scientific references for all 14 of these points. Thank you.

VOW · #85 30th September 2002, 06:15 PM

To RA:

"Reading Latin" wouldn't have assured the coins on the eyes of the Figure in the Shroud. They weren't described in the Bible; it was a Roman custom, and the coins used were Roman coins. So our forger would have had to scrounge up some 1300-year-old coins.

In the 1300s, MOST people had to struggle from dawn to dusk to merely SURVIVE. You've got our boy running back and forth between Europe and Palestine, AND doing research in Latin. He's also doing groundbreaking forensic analysis which won't be "rediscovered" for another 600 years or so. AND he's also inventing photography, which will lag behind his discovery by 500-plus years.

Your forger sounds like Leonardo daVinci. Only problem is, he wasn't BORN then.

Peace,
~VOW

RufusAtticus · #86 30th September 2002, 06:24 PM

Originally posted by VOW
"Reading Latin" wouldn't have assured the coins on the eyes of the Figure in the Shroud. They weren't described in the Bible; it was a Roman custom, and the coins used were Roman coins. So our forger would have had to scrounge up some 1300-year-old coins.

And yet burial with coins is all over Latin literature. Where did I suggest that the forger only knew about Rome from the Bible? Finding coins (assuming that there are coins) is not hard to do. Rome made a heck of a lot of them.

Your forger sounds like Leonardo daVinci. Only problem is, he wasn't BORN then.

Actually the forger sounds like a palestinan monk.

VOW · #87 30th September 2002, 06:26 PM

To Rufus:

Please provide scientific references for all 14 of these points.

Nah, we've worked our heinies off providing you with all kinds of information. It's time for YOU to go to work to refute it. Go dig up a 14th-Century GENIUS who had incredible artistic skills, unlimited finances, the ability to travel between Europe and Palestine at whim, archaeological resources AND the desire to create such an artifact, and show some of the notes he left where he developed the ability to scorch the fabric and provide digitizable imagery. He had to have SOME work left behind for posterity. There's REAMS of information left by daVinci, showing his submarine and his helicopter!

Present us with an imposter, and maybe we'll think about it.

Peace,
~VOW

RufusAtticus · #88 30th September 2002, 06:31 PM

Souljah and you have claimed that these 14 things are true about the shroud. I want you to back it up. Until you do so I have nothing to refute.

P.S. I'm still waiting on the scientific refences that demonstrate that the 1988/89 dating was contaminated by microorganisms and fire.

VOW · #89 30th September 2002, 06:50 PM

To RA:

You'll have to buy the book, then. I'm NOT going to loan you mine. Most of the items that Souljah mentioned in his list of 14 are detailed by the NASA scientists who wrote the book, The Shroud of Turin, and in that book is a detailed description of how they digitized the image from the shroud and created the 3-D representation that Souljah posted here.

YOU are the one who has the argument with their discoveries, so... give us a very plausible forger who was capable of doing all these advanced techniques in the 1300s. And this guy has GOT to have the resources available to him that I detailed above. It's easy to sit back and say, "Well, *he* used this, *he* did that, *he* would have...." But let's take into account there were no photographs, no advanced forensic studies, no telephones, computers, fax machines, or even RELIABLE transportation available to the majority of the population.

And this incredibly wealthy, brilliant, TALENTED guy managed to keep all of his secrets to himself, and remained completely anonymous.

Uh huh.

Peace,
~VOW

RufusAtticus · #90 30th September 2002, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by VOW
You'll have to buy the book, then.

LOL. I ask for scientific references and you tell me to go buy a book.

Funny. Funny. Funny.

P.S. I don't argue with the 3D imaging. It proves my point rather well. A human head could not have made the face on the turin shroud.