Thread: It’s not just Santorum who believes in Satan

Originally Posted by SpotsCat

The Shroud of Turin hasn't been proven to be anything other than a religious artifact with a murky past.

Whether or not it is what it is portrayed to be is still unknown.

In 1988 a radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, concurred that the samples they tested dated from the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390

explain above then

The Shroud of Turin is off-topic, but I must say this:

No one has explained how the image got on the shroud.

No one has been able to replicate the process.

If this is some "medieval forger" he knew science that is not yet known today.

Also, how would someone in the middle ages think to put a negative image on the shroud, hundreds of years before the invention of photography?

Another issue: people in the middle ages thought that Christ was nailed in the palms of the hand. On the Shroud, the nail wounds are through the wrists.

Originally Posted by Flag

explain above then

If you had read the sentence immediately after the one you posted, you would have your explanation.

You stated "In 1988 a radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, concurred that the samples they tested dated from the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390."

The referenced article reads -- (bold type mine)

Originally Posted by Wikipedia :

In 1988 a controversial radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, concurred that the samples they tested dated from the Middle Ages, between 1260 and 1390. At least four articles have since been published in scholarly sources contending that the samples used for the dating test may not have been representative of the whole shroud.

This article in Wikipedia details the controversy surrounding the carbon-14 dating tests. It closed by stating --

Originally Posted by Wikipedia :

More realistically, Joseph G. Marino and M. Sue Benford proposed that the sampled area of the cloth may have been unoriginal (none of the sample contained a "stained" area), as almost 60% of the cloth is because of the progressive repairs throughout the centuries. Scholar Raymond Rogers argued, in a 2005 article, that the chemical analysis he performed confirmed this hypothesis - as the samples used in the carbon-dating show evident traces of tanning products, likely used by medieval weavers to match the colour of the original weave when performing repairs and backing the shroud for additional protection. Others have also presented supporting evidence in this direction.

Maybe the Shroud of Turin is what it portends to be, maybe it isn't. I believe it is.

BTW - Nice job of selective editing on your post!

Originally Posted by Blackrook

The Shroud of Turin is off-topic, but I must say this:

No one has explained how the image got on the shroud.

No one has been able to replicate the process.

If this is some "medieval forger" he knew science that is not yet known today.

Also, how would someone in the middle ages think to put a negative image on the shroud, hundreds of years before the invention of photography?

Another issue: people in the middle ages thought that Christ was nailed in the palms of the hand. On the Shroud, the nail wounds are through the wrists.

Techniques have been invented, lost, and reininvented (or not, in some cases) over time. Just because we are more scientifically advanced than medieval people doesn't mean that anything they can do we can do better. An intriguing mystery? Yes. Evidence of supernaturalness? Not really.

Originally Posted by Blackrook

It’s not just Santorum who believes in Satan

Indeed. There are some very stupid people running around loose today, still spouting medieval superstitions as fact.
Look at the number of fools who are voting for santorum.
They are no better than the Muslim extremists who run around spouting medieval nonsense from their religion.
That's why there is no place in government for any religious dogmatism.

Originally Posted by Surfer Joe

Indeed. There are some very stupid people running around loose today, still spouting medieval superstitions as fact.
Look at the number of fools who are voting for santorum.
They are no better than the Muslim extremists who run around spouting medieval nonsense from their religion.
That's why there is no place in government for any religious dogmatism.

Muslim extremists kill people.

I thought I'd point that out for the mentally challenged amongst us that cannot winnow out a difference between Christians and extremist Muslims.

Originally Posted by Subdermal

Muslim extremists kill people.
I thought I'd point that out for the mentally challenged amongst us that cannot winnow out a difference between Christians and extremist Muslims.

Maybe doctors and nurses working in clinics aren't considered people by the right-wing "pro-life" crowd who murder them or the useful idiots who applaud their actions, but that comes as no surprise to anyone with a brain.
Religious extremists are all cut from the same rancid cloth of hate.

Originally Posted by Surfer Joe

Maybe doctors and nurses working in clinics aren't considered people by the right-wing "pro-life" crowd who murder them or the useful idiots who applaud their actions, but that comes as no surprise to anyone with a brain.
Religious extremists are all cut from the same rancid cloth of hate.

You're trying to equate the two, while engaging in your own hatred?

Check out a mirror please.

Originally Posted by Subdermal

You're trying to equate the two, while engaging in your own hatred?
Check out a mirror please.

Translation:
Oops...I got caught spouting rubbish again so I must try to change the topic.

Originally Posted by Subdermal

Support your claim with a cite. Most of the people in this country believe in Satan; that leaves less than 20% which do not.

That 20% wasn't voting for Santorum regardless, making your claim absolutely ignorant.

Do 80% of Americans believe that Satan has overtaken academia and the Protestant church? Provide a cite(citation, since cite is a verb, not a noun).