Yes but when you wearn’t looking the Israeli Gov’t set up a secret agency whose task is to ’discover’ evidence of ancient occupation of 'Jewish land', much of it outside the expanding boundaries of the present state. One is again reminded of Berdard Shaw’s shortest poem :- “How odd of God, To choose the Jews”.
I had to dig deep for this as it’s been a few years since I studied the shroud intensely http://www.kolbecenter.org/wp-conte...e-Holy-Family-Apologetics-Shroud-of-Turin.pdf Dr. Adler then proceeded to apply microspectrophotometric analysis of a “blood particle” from one of the fibrils of the shroud and unmistakably identified hemoglobin in the acid methemoglobin form due to great age and denaturation. Further tests by Heller and Adler established, within scientific certainty, the presence of porphyrin, bilirubin, albumin and protein. In fact, when proteases were applied to the fibril containing the “blood,” the blood dissolved from the fibril leaving an imageless fibril. (Heller, J. H., Adler, A. D., Applied Optics, 19, 1980, pp 2742-4; Heller, J. H., and Adler, A. D., Canadian Forensic Society Sci, Journal 14, 1981, pp 81-103) Their results dealt with this and the fact that the red stuff on the shroud was truly blood . These results were published in both applied optics and canadien forensics society both peer reviewed journals . They definitely know that there was no image under the blood when the blood was dissolved by protease .
What I want to know now beer is why did you ask me if what I said was backed by peer reviewed science and you didnt bother to ask your fellow atheist who published the video on the Luigi replica of his work was peer reviewed . In fact it wasn’t peer reviewed and Luigi himself said it didn’t replicate the shroud in many aspects when he released his work to be critiqued . The 2009 Luigi replica was refuted within months after it came out and it had many other problems besides him putting the image first then the blood . Putting the image first makes it a cinch to then know exactly where to add the blood to make it seem that the blood was anatomically correct . Unfortunately as Adler and heller found out there was no image under the blood . The blood actually blocked image formation under it . Interesting fact heller the assistant to Adler was a student under Albert Einstein when he was one of the students elected under a special Program by Einstein . Do a google search for shroud of Turin Adler Einstein
Jet, here we go with the proof thing as soon as an atheist gets insecure a bit . Actually atheists who have researched the shroud are obsessed with debunking it as if they don’t want it to be true . We are not going by proof here . This is called science and in science we research things to see which side the evidence leans towards . True the shroud is not proven true or false but the evidence so far fits eerily with something out of the ordinary happening on that shroud , especially since science can’t replicate it . That fact alone makes heads stand up straight whether atheist , agnostic or Christian . As agnostic Cambridge art historian thomas wesselow said the shroud doesn’t conform to any art style in any era of art history . Don’t you find that odd Jet . The shroud and ndes are my favorite subject , Mainly with the effect they have on most Atheists . I must admit though that ndes atr closet to be shown to Be real which is why I’ve intensified my research into ndes . The problem with the shroud is getting access to it recently as the Vatican is afraid of seeing more pieces of it destroyed in testing .
Trevor I don’t like the word supernatural . It makes me very uncomfortable using it . What exactly does it mean ?? Well basically it’s something outside the laws of natural but it could be other laws of nature we don’t know about but that argument doesn’t go against god being the cause of it . Dr Sam Parnia the leading NDE researcher in the world who used to be an NDE sceptic. But has come over to our side says he believes now that ndes lean towards the soul being amseperate entity then the brain but since he’s a materialist he still believes that the soul is some kind of material substance that’s very subtle . So far almost all the evidence from ndeseans towards consciousness being a separate entity then the brain Remember to God the supernatural is really natural so those 2 terms are extremely vague to me . Ok enough of my hypocritalmself going off topic especially since I begged you all to stay on topic lol
If that was the only way, there'd be no reason for a new way, would there. So god of OT would stayed the god of the OT.]I\ I form the light and create darkness; I make peace and create evil: I am the LORD that does all this. Evil is love? That is just the nature of the world.
Nothing is outside the laws of nature. We may not understand everything, but they are certainly within the realms of nature.
Because I have read the evidence Luigi produced but was finding trouble to actually get what Adler came up with. We still do not have it the PDF you supplied was not it. We do have a interview with Adler which is far less certain than what subsequent commentaries suggest. https://www.ancient-origins.net/art...stigator-shroud-turin-research-project-021841 It also points to the evidence of Dr McCrone and why Alder disagreed with his findings which contradicted Alder. Yes, however you are missing the point, Luigi was trying to show a way that the image could of been created, he went a long way towards doing that. There is no evidence for how the image was actually produced. It was not refuted, arguments against it were produced but it is still the best attempt we have to explain the image. No the latest evidence is that the blood is not anatomically correct. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1556-4029.13867 The inconsistencies identified by the authors seem not only to point against their own reality, but against the authenticity of the Shroud itself, suggesting that the Turin linen was an artistic or “didactic” representation from the XIV century. This new Bloodstain Pattern Analysis supports the historical records 27, the radiocarbon dating 1, and the chemical analysis 6-11. And still we have the biblical evidence which suggests both the cloth itself and the wounds do not agree with the biblical description.
Why believers want others to accept the shroud as ‘the real thing’ is in and of itself a mystery. Even if it was proven to come from the time Jesus was on the planet do they imagine we’d all suddenly get down on our knees and worship? It’s a good thing nobody has attempted through ‘science’ to analyse the thousands of parts of the true cross dutifully kissed by believers over the centuries. There are enough to build Noah’s ark.
Bear as I said Luigi was refuted for the simple fact that the blood came first . This is a settled issue . I don’t need to go into how the image has many other factors about it that don’t fit with Luigi’s image . This is a settled matter and isn’t up for debate .im amazed that the reason you gave for not asking your fellow atheist for peer reviewed evidence and since you didn’t ask for it I’m going to assume that your going to look for it yourself for me in my future responses to you . I’m gonna give you the same standard of evidence that you ask flrnfrom your fellow atheists . I’m Going to assume since your a fair person your going to agree to that. As for the blood stain pattern Luigi used the bpa approach which is a highly questionable technique that even the national academy of science doesn’t trust . http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/2018/08/my-critique-of-borrini-m-garlaschelli-l.html?m=1 BPA" stands for "Bloodstain pattern analysis," which "... has drawn more skeptical scrutiny since 2000 ... BPA is done by crime investigators using subjective hunches ... The National Academy of Sciences in 2009 ... questioned the reliability of their methods in the courtroom": "Bloodstain Pattern Analysis (BPA), one of several specialties in the field of forensic science, involves the study and analysis of bloodstains at a known or suspected violent crime scene with the goal of helping investigators draw conclusions about the nature, timing and other details of the crime. The use of bloodstains as evidence is not new; however, new experts have claimed to be able to use fluid dynamics, physics, and other calculations to determine with accuracy previous events at a crime scene. For example, the shape of blood droplets might be used to draw conclusions as to how far away the victim was from a gun when they were shot. This technique of forensic science has drawn more skeptical scrutiny since 2000; large amounts of the body of work in BPA is done by crime investigators using subjective hunches rather than scientists from other disciplines. A report released by The National Academy of Sciences in 2009 highlighted several incidents of blood spatter analysts to overstate their qualifications as well as questioned the reliability of their methods in the courtroom"[8].As we shall see "subjective hunches" play a decisive role in this attempt by Borrini and Garlaschelli to discredit the Shroud! Again it’s a sensationalized Piece written by a guy that already assumes the end before he starts his studies . He got many things wrong in his most current blood pattern analysis as Stephen jones points out in his critique of it . The paper completely dismantled Luigi again as he used mostly subjective hunches. He also ignored past analysis by a few forensic medical Experts . This paper is also refuted thoroughly bear . As for the c14 dating that’s already called into question through ray Rogers peer reviewed micro chemical analysis published in thermochimica acta I’m 2005. http://www.shroud.it/ROGERS-3.PDF And confirmed again by microscopist john L brown of Georgia tech . https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/brown1.pdf And please don’t bring up mccrones findings as they were refuted way before Luigi cane on the scene . Mccrone also broke many protocols with sturp and broke the trust of his friend ray Rogers thermal chemist at Los alamos and an agnostic himself who first recommended mccrone . Mccrone said that the blood was Paint and Adler through peer reviewed hard science blood chemical analysis determined it was blood . As for only having an interview , it is well known by the more Honest atheists who had access to the peer reviewed work that it’s well known and established that there was no image under the blood area . Your beating a dead horse bear with all old and refuted evidences . Do you have any other objections to the shroud ??
I don’t want you to believe it’s the real thing as I myself arent 100% sure it’s the real thing . I go up and down on the percentage depending on the day . What I want you to do is be open minded , not pretend to be open minded when you already assume the conclusion before you start . Notice that when bear was trying to refute it he accepted his fellow atheists video link without asking him for peer reviewed evidence to back his video up with but when it came to me he didn’t hesitate to ask for peer reviewed papers which I then supplied . There is an emotional bias here which is what I see from most atheists , not only for the shroud but especially from ndes which I consider to be much more challenging for the atheist worldview then the shroud . All I ask is that you be open minded to the evidences by not asking for different standards of evidences from one side as opposed to the other . This is what I call a persons disposition . This is all part of the atheists disposition to whether they want God to exist or if they don’t want God to exist . Most atheists don’t want God to exist and they will Try their best to hide that fact but it comes out only when they are out to the test as I showed in my exchange with bear. If you want him to exist my friend there is evidence out there . When I was an atheist myself I was never an atheist who wished and hoped that god didn’t exist as I never understood the benefit or rationality of this way of thinking . I was a reluctant atheist who hated my atheism but I could not leave it unless I had good logic and evidence to leave it . It took me 4 years of deep research to find those reasons and I eventually came back To god . It wasn’t from some subjective personal experience with god (as much as my fellow Christians wanted it to be for me ) as I don’t trust my feelings . For me it was evidenced based and you can see that in my argumentation . I also don’t have a problem with evolution which does draw some gasps from my fellow Christians . I’m a Michael behe guy . One of my favorite guys who speaks on social issues is linguist john McWhorter who like me is a centrist .even though he is an atheist I still like the fact that he isn’t afraid to voice his opinion to bother republicans and democrats . Here is an atheist whose email was posted on another atheists blog of how the shroud of Turin made him into an agnostic https://new.exchristian.net/2011/03/how-shroud-of-turin-made-me-agnostic.html?m=1Theists
No I am not beating a dead horse I am looking at all the evidence without prejudice, I do not know what the Shroud is. You are doing what conspiracy theorists always do and saying any evidence you do not like has been refuted whereas the evidence that you think supports your conspiracy theory you accept without question. I have nothing against the Shroud it is a very interesting article from the 13th or 14th century.
And there is your problem, you have confused your emotions about atheists and politics with trying to discover what the Shroud is and how it was made.
and it was my hope that by providing a little scientific evidence; non-believers are always asking for scientific evidence; that non-believers might just consider a truly astounding bit of evidence that indicates what Believers already know happened with the Death and Resurrection of God come to Earth.
There is absolutely no evidence linking the Shroud to someone who may or may not have existed called Jesus. If there is then please provide it. What we have is the image of a crucified man on a linen cloth, we are not certain of the process by which it was made. Anything else is not based on scientific evidence but speculation.
The mystery to me is why anyone would want to discard the authenticity of the Shroud as being Christ's burial cloth? What do they fear - Christianity? Just the idea that someone would forge Christ's burial cloth, when people were unaware that a burial cloth even existed and when negatives were unknown boggles the mind. The purpose of relics was to foster people's faith in God through their curative powers, otherwise there was no reason for them. This is why there were shrines all over Europe, and this is why people made pilgrimages. So what logic is there is forging a relic during an age when there were relics all over Europe from the sacking of Constantinople, and when it wouldn't have the curative powers of an original? I should think it would be easier for a forger to get a bone and say it was the finger of some saint and martyr rather than go to all that trouble.
Again if you were looking at all the evidence without prejudice you would have asked your fellow atheist for peer reviewed documentation to back up his assrtion . You’ve already shown you have a bias by this fact alone bear . This shows we can’t have a conversation without prejudice on your end .
The fact that your saying Jesus May or may not have existed points to you being a Christ mythicist . If I knew this beforehand beat I would not have engaged in dialogue with you . Christ mythicist are considered detached from reality even from the opinion of their fellow atheists . I will dialogue with someone more rational on this that isn’t based in non reality
Todd don’t be so sure my friend . Remember there are also seekers and agnostics lurking around that aren’t signed up on these forums . I stumbled onto the shroud through atheists myself when they came and parades on our forum saying that the Luigi replication debunked the shroud . I didn’t know what the shroud was until they brought it up . Ironic huh I had a 6 month long debate on the shroud with an atheist who had a Christian girlfriend. It was a 6 month long debate that was very intense .he’s a great person and has worked in charity for many years feeding the poor and helping the sick . One day I his signature post change from a typical atheist sky daddy post to a post about Marcus arelius that basically said to live a good life and if a god exists you will be rewarded for it . He changed to become an agnostic .
The reason I said that God as a punishing Father figure is very instructive, has to do with my readings of history. By relating events that happened after the Biblical events, I found that the 'supposed' punishments of God (which were not really from God but from our own heart and actions), occurred whenever an area pulled away from God. The occult was always prevalent in their destruction and suffering, as was homosexuality. As for the New Testament, when God felt the time was ripe, He gave us a full revelation of what He consisted of with the incarnation of His Word/Son so we could enter His Kingdom/Existence. God showed us that He consisted of pure sacrificial love. Where did you pick up the bit that light is darkness and construction is destruction. Oh that's right, I forgot about our New Orwellian Dictionary. I should think those things would be in opposition to one another.
And your off, how on earth does saying Jesus may or may not have existed suggest I am a mythicist? It points to the fact I do not know not one way or the other. But you have made your mind up and now you will skew any evidence to back up your bias. Just because I do not state what you want me to think about your god rational debate on the Shroud is over, so funny! Meanwhile we have no evidence showing the Shroud is connected to Jesus even if he did exist. Now the pretence has dropped and we see the closed mind of the believer.
The term icon means picture, so it is both an icon and a relic. The holiness it projects would be the same as a relic, if not much more. Of course this all depends on a person's faith when approaching it. Faith is the key word.
