New research on the Shroud of Turin

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Of course it's possible. Happens all the time. People are clinically dead, and revived. The difference here is the three day time period, give or take, and no medical intervention.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Of course it's possible. Happens all the time. People are clinically dead, and revived. The difference here is the three day time period, give or take, and no medical intervention.

So then why aren't there light imprints all over hospital sheets?

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Of course it's possible. Happens all the time. People are clinically dead, and revived. The difference here is the three day time period, give or take, and no medical intervention.

So then why aren't there light imprints all over hospital sheets?

Different means of resurrection.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
Clearly you completely miss the point. If proven, that would mean it was proven that the image was, in fact, created by someone coming back to life, who was dead. Proven from the right time period (and pollen data indicates that's likely), and proven to fit the description of what happened to Jesus, which it does.

What exactly would that medical mechanism of resurrection be? I think you may be confusing Jesus with a microwave burrito.

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Of course it's possible. Happens all the time. People are clinically dead, and revived. The difference here is the three day time period, give or take, and no medical intervention.

So then why aren't there light imprints all over hospital sheets?

Different means of resurrection.

Oh, so there are different means of coming back to life. I'm following now. When a body is reanimated into a flesh-eating zombie, does that create the light effect on sheets as well or does that fall into the category of non-light imprinting resurrection like coming back after a heart attack?

Gosh there are so many ways of coming back to life, I had no idea! This opens so many avenues for scientific studies and the scientists of the world will be baying for the chance to speak with you to discuss all of this!

I think where you and I are going to come to an impasse is whether or not vampires actually do sparkle or not. You may well come at me with the claim that they do and that this also may be the cause of the light imprint on sheets, but I personally am convinced that vampires do not in fact sparkle and that the Twilight Books and Films were a disinformation campaign to confuse us all and dissuade us from knowing the truth. My position is that vampires do not sparkle and that this would absolutely not cause an anthropomorphic photo imprint on a sheet.

My experience with zombies is that they generally ooze gross stuff so this is a much more plausible explanation for an imprint, but I find it implausible that Cesare Borgia was one. Good grief this whole concept is so deep, isn't it?

a reply to: Blue Shift

When a body is wrapped in a sheet it will never give the exact replica of features because it will not settle right, will wrinkle, and leave a abnormal shape of the person underneath it. There are over 7 billion people on earth and to get a exact bodily imprint will be absolutely impossible.

If a person were to cover themselves with a fluid that will absorb in a sheet when fully wrapped will always come out in the sheet a deformed and distorted image of who was underneath it. Even if it molded perfectly to their face and body there is zero possibility that a 3D image will appear...yet alone of a woven thornbush on someone's head.

People, use logic. I definitely believe that Christ died and was wrapped in cloths of long linen strips as the scriptures say as one will do like the Egyptians did with their dead (Matthew 27:59, Mark 15:46, Luke 23:53, John 19:40 ). Even in some translations that doesn't say linen strips do pluralize cloth(s) to indicate something other than one whole piece of fabric covered Jesus' body.

The shroud of Turin is nothing more than a fake and fraud brought to you by Catholicism.

originally posted by: Transparent
a reply to: Blue Shift

The shroud of Turin is nothing more than a fake and fraud brought to you by Catholicism.

More likely, Leonardo da Vinci, who was a closet freethinker who never believed Jesus was resurrected and who deliberately introduced errors into his fabrication of the burial shroud of Jesus in order to expose the Catholic Church as a spiritual scam for its using bogus religious relics to attract belief in (Catholic) Christianity - like burial cloths......

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: hangedman13


I think it's a bit of a leap of logic to claim that elevated creatinine levels are indicative of a person being tortured. It excludes all other possibilities and with occasion razor, the more likely scenario is elevated creatinine due to kidney disease than a victim of torture.

The methodology of the research is sound. It's the conclusions that I'm a little skeptical about.

.

Conclusions could be incorrect. Your "likely" scenario you should question with equal scepticism, as that would bring your perspective under the practice of Real Scientific Scepticism. You could be right, but it's highly likely if there is blood on the face that contaminated the shroud, that would conclude that it was not caused by "kidney disease" unless you can provide evidence that it causes bleeding out ones pores.

You can think me another time for pointing out the fallacy of your kidney statement.

It is Occams Razor btw. Just saying l

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes
Clearly you completely miss the point. If proven, that would mean it was proven that the image was, in fact, created by someone coming back to life, who was dead. Proven from the right time period (and pollen data indicates that's likely), and proven to fit the description of what happened to Jesus, which it does.

What exactly would that medical mechanism of resurrection be? I think you may be confusing Jesus with a microwave burrito.

I said they were not the same. You are the one trying to claim that they are the same thing. Clearly, they are not.

I simply stated that people can, in fact, come back from being dead.

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing

originally posted by: LadyGreenEyes

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Of course it's possible. Happens all the time. People are clinically dead, and revived. The difference here is the three day time period, give or take, and no medical intervention.

So then why aren't there light imprints all over hospital sheets?

Different means of resurrection.

Oh, so there are different means of coming back to life. I'm following now. When a body is reanimated into a flesh-eating zombie, does that create the light effect on sheets as well or does that fall into the category of non-light imprinting resurrection like coming back after a heart attack?

Gosh there are so many ways of coming back to life, I had no idea! This opens so many avenues for scientific studies and the scientists of the world will be baying for the chance to speak with you to discuss all of this!

I think where you and I are going to come to an impasse is whether or not vampires actually do sparkle or not. You may well come at me with the claim that they do and that this also may be the cause of the light imprint on sheets, but I personally am convinced that vampires do not in fact sparkle and that the Twilight Books and Films were a disinformation campaign to confuse us all and dissuade us from knowing the truth. My position is that vampires do not sparkle and that this would absolutely not cause an anthropomorphic photo imprint on a sheet.

My experience with zombies is that they generally ooze gross stuff so this is a much more plausible explanation for an imprint, but I find it implausible that Cesare Borgia was one. Good grief this whole concept is so deep, isn't it?

Facetious much?

There are medical means, which most people accept as being real. This is proof that such a thing can happen. In the case of Jesus some other means would have been at work, and we do not know what that was.

Zombies? Vampires? Off topic much, or are you simply fascinated with such things? If that's all you've got, don't bother.

I wonder what happened to that other rope that apparently ether cursed or cause great pain to that Roman soldier that stabbed him?

It not very Christ like? Is that what Jesus would do?

originally posted by: Specimen
I wonder what happened to that other rope that apparently ether cursed or cause great pain to that Roman soldier that stabbed him?

It not very Christ like? Is that what Jesus would do?

Perhaps instead of assuming you know a thing about theology, you should pick up a book to answer your questions. It's obvious you don't have any knowledge of any religion, the public library is your friend. And so is Google.

But don't let me stop you from Cheetos and burritos. That's all the education America expects of your kind these days...:devil

originally posted by: GusMcDangerthing
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

I think first they'd need to prove that it's possible to come back to life. There is just so much fantasy and implausible, unproven nonsense being discussed here. What you have pointed out are giant leaps after a thousand other questions must be answered and what you call likely, is not.

Except that boy in India that woke up while being buried. Plenty of questions sure, but you have zero facts to call anything likely, or not.

Explain the magic of anesthetic, last I checked scientists have yet to provide na adequate explanations for how it works.

Also proof of coming back to life...hmmmm.....I wonder, if by some sorcerous word I read somewhere...that I could make your argument a laughing stock of arguments... Oh wait..... I think it's coming o me now.

Defibrillator!

It Lives!!!! Dumb#

a reply to: Catscratch

Idk, every one so worried about this one, they kind of forgot how dangerous the other one is.

And I like tacos, and regular and I live in Canada...let me guess, European? Or American since we're so critical?

originally posted by: Specimen
a reply to: Catscratch

Idk, every one so worried about this one, they kind of forgot how dangerous the other one is.

And I like tacos, and regular and I live in Canada...let me guess, European? Or lAmerican since we're so critical?

A guy from Canada who likes tacos... Lol. No one is worried about a thing but you. And some others like zombie guy up there.

But tacos? Not a diss, cause tacos rule. But uh as for euro or Americano, cross of both.(father came direct from Wales)
As for my critique, I thought that's what denying ignorance and the Age of reason was all about.

I don't care about the shroud. I just find the findings interesting, and I do not think " magic rope" has any part of the conversation. I respect what you have as opinion excepting when you make up no theologically based tales about cursed ropes in order to insult beliefs you apparently have not researched thoroughly.

Tacos... Well anyway, while we are guessing origins of critique, let me give you one of mine. Canadian youngsters I have encountered have shown a pompous lack of respect in general towards others, and a general disregard for thoughts not their own, a judgemental addiction to looking down their partially french noses. Does that judgement apply to you as well? I would recommend in the future, that you try not to "guess" where people are from based on your shortsighted assumptions. It's rude in general and only can be accompanied by a false sense of superiority I have found In the spoiled and sheltered lives of the french Canadian youth.

See how mean that sounds? Don't do it unless you want it back, it's presumptive and does nothing for our debate here other than change course to a nationalistic and somewhat racial derailing of the subject we should be debating.

So to get back on a proper course I should start with telling you I think your country is a wonderful place that I would love to visit, that your people are the best integrated around the globe, and finally, most importantly after a couple ales, what kind of tacos are your favorite, and what is the establishment you get your tacos from up there? Cause I have heard Canadian have some great cuisine, but a taco lover from Canada? I gotta know more about this.

a reply to: Catscratch

Canada literally a parallel version of the u.s, the main difference I guess would be the politics and laws. Americans carry guns, Canadians can almost carry weed.

Yea the quebec ers have a tendency to keep to themselves mainly, especially if you can't speak French. Never ask a cop there for directions.

Poutines good, but other then that, we are kind of talking about Rome here, and a clothe that apparently has his blood. While the robe I was talking about the one he was crucified with, and is was probably drenched with it. There was even a story of it causing illness on the Roman that stabbed him, and eventually just got taken away by some Saint an is never heard of again.

Maybe they locked into a box and tossed it in the depths of the ocean.

a reply to: Specimen

Ahhhh a robe? Huh. I must look this up. I never read of this story. I thought you said rope. Anyway. Tell me of the taco. I assume a taco Bell is up there in Quebec but if those are your favorite mom's cooking must be harsh. Anyways I will read any updates tomorrow. It's my time to pass out. Big day at work tomorrow. Sorry for misinterpreting your original statement. I still want to know about the tacos you love! Cause if Canada has tacos then perhaps I won't be so lost there lol.
Btw, I never ask directions. I buy a map, and use google to find everything else. If I need some weed I hit up the guy at the bar that looks chilla

a reply to: Catscratch

But seriously. To stay on topic. Have you ever seen the Virgin ........in your tacos? Double innuendo Bam!

a reply to: Specimen

Never heard those stories, but I have heard a midrash saying the spearman who apparently was very old and blind, regained his sight when he punctured the chest of Christ, possibly indicating that he was close enough to touch Jesus and count ribs to heal him from pneumothorax i.e. a collapsed lung. When the hemothorax gushed out and hit the blind man in his eyes they supposedly all agreed that the water and blood was a sign that the blind man could indeed see-- with his skills and his knowledge. Then, as the story goes, that evening at Erev Pesach (a Wednesday) in the Hebrew year 3796 (AD 36)-- one thing lead to another and Jesus was walking and talking Sunday morning, three-and-a-half days later at daybreak on Adar 17th.

In AD 36 there came out rumours all around the Roman Empire that the emperor (Tiberius Caesar) was dead, so it would make at least some sense that Jesus would parade through Jerusalem on a stolen donkey posing as the new Caesar, complete with bread and circus.