It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

40 yrs ago STURP began in Vatican City, 1st time a major Relic Scientifically studied

page: 1
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   
The Peace of God to all that belong to the Light
Dear Readers,

4 decades ago the Shroud of Turin Research Project began their activities in the Vatican city, they became on the second week of October of 1978 the very first interdisciplinary Independent team of scientists that had access to a major religious relic on History, that happened to be also an extraordinary Historic object, which characteristics are unique.

This burial cloth has been in exhibition in Western Europe since the XIII Century and apparently was brought to France by the Templar crusades leaded by the Knight Jeffrey of Charney as product of their looting in the sack of Constantinople in the 4th Crusade.

It is believed the cloth wrapped the dead body of one of the most relevant figures of the western civilization: Joshua Bar Josef, the Historic Jesus of Nazareth, a preacher of the first century of our era, who was violently executed after a summary trial by Roman Authorities under charged of sedition or rebellion against Rome, that is the central figure of the most popular religious tradition of the world.

Please check:
www.shroud.com...


Forty years ago today, on October 8, 1978, the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) team began their historic, first ever in-depth scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin in a makeshift "laboratory" in the Royal Palace of Turin.
The examination took place over a period of five days and nights, from October 8 through 13, 1978. In commemoration of that historic event, we have been celebrating the anniversary year by including some special materials in each of our regular website updates and culminating with this Special STURP Update today.
After forty years, we felt it was time to publish ALL twenty of STURP's original, peer-reviewed papers, so they are now available to everyone (for the first time on the internet) here on Shroud.com


STURP had exclusive and direct access to the burial cloth to test it using the most modern technology of the time in order to try to verify its age but also the origin of the so enigmatic phantom image of a crucified man that appear stamped on it.

Space era technology of image pattern recognition was used to scan the shroud, using different spectra ( X rays, infrared etc) and it was found that the image was Not painted at all, but mysteriously stamped by a source of Energy and it had tridimensional information, not just a flat image characteristics as it happens with standard modern photography.


After years of exhaustive study and evaluation of the data, STURP issued its Final Report in 1981. The following official summary of their conclusions was distributed at the press conference held after their final meeting in October 1981:
No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies.
Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood.
However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography. The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry.
For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint.
At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin.
The scientific concensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself.
Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.
Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery. We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin.
The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved.


please check:
www.shroud.com...

The thread is open to discuss the findings of STURP and also details on the different tests that were carried out by the panel of scientists, many of which came from American Institutes and Agencies interested in to study the object and determine its authenticity and fascinating properties.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

The shroud is apparently 628 year old fake according to modern forensic analysis.

www.news.com.au...

Probably one of humanities early attempts a form of photography.
edit on 1-11-2018 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Paint a negative on a pane of glass.
Attach a piece of cloth treated with a photo reactive chemical.
Expose it to light.
I believe it is the work of an experimental genius.
Not buying the whole Jesus thing.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: andy06shake

Really? what are you going to tell next, that somebody of the intellectual height and impeccable reputation of Leonardo Da Vinci, among the most serious scientists of History, was involved in a such a "Hoax", please this is a serious thread on science if you have not yet noticed it.

Excuse me there was no Photography technology what so ever, before the XIX century so that is a claim that has not been substantiated and is highly speculative, it enters in what I may call DaVinci Code fiction literature.

By the way DaVinci was born three centuries after the first records of the Shroud of Turin in the west, it was longly known and exhibited in France before even his grand parents were born.


Around 1717 Johann Heinrich Schulze captured cut-out letters on a bottle of a light-sensitive slurry, but he apparently never thought of making the results durable.
Around 1800 Thomas Wedgwood made the first reliably documented, although unsuccessful attempt at capturing camera images in permanent form. His experiments did produce detailed photograms, but Wedgwood and his associate Humphry Davy found no way to fix these images.
In the mid-1820s, Nicéphore Niépce first managed to fix an image that was captured with a camera, but at least eight hours or even several days of exposure in the camera were required and the earliest results were very crude. Niépce's associate Louis Daguerre went on to develop the daguerreotype process, the first publicly announced and commercially viable photographic process.
The daguerreotype required only minutes of exposure in the camera, and produced clear, finely detailed results. The details were introduced as a gift to the world in 1839, a date generally accepted as the birth year of practical photography. The metal-based daguerreotype process soon had some competition from the paper-based calotype negative and salt print processes invented by William Henry Fox Talbot. Subsequent innovations made photography easier and more versatile. New materials reduced the required camera exposure time from minutes to seconds, and eventually to a small fraction of a second; new photographic media were more economical, sensitive or convenient, including roll films for casual use by amateurs. In the mid-20th century, developments made it possible for amateurs to take pictures in natural color as well as in black-and-white.


Please check:
A concise History of Photography by Helmut Gemsheim

Thanks for your reply,

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 04:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: The angel of light

The shroud is apparently 628 year old fake according to modern forensic analysis.

www.news.com.au...

Probably one of humanities early attempts a form of photography.


The 3d thing was a joke many paintings show the same effect. If you think about it of course they would an artist will encode 3d information in paintings because that's how we see the world

The Vatican has known it was fake for hundreds of years. Bishop d’Arcis was writing in 1390, to Pope Clement VII said that it was a painting and not the actual shroud. His investigation showed it was a hoax.
edit on 11/1/18 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

I have never seen the name of Christ displayed like that. what links can you provide as to it's authenticity?


Joshua Bar Josef,



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Well, I speak some Aramaic and Hebrew by the way and i know certainly what is the name he actually had in his own culture and language.

There is also the variant Yeshua Ben Yosef, but apart of the slightly different transliteration of phonemes, that is in modern Hebrew, not in ancient Aramaic.

Here are some links to satisfy your curiosity:

Please check:

What was the true name of Jesus of Nazareth?

The original Aramaic name of Jesus Christ

Joshua the Christ

Now, perhaps the eldest mention of Jesus of Nazareth in the Talmudic literature is on the Babylonian Talmud folio 43, where he is called by the name Yeshu and mentioned as a man hanged for sorcery charges.

Of course crucifiction was considered by the Hebrews as a modality of hanging execution and the accusation itself clearly suggests that the supernatural powers of Jesus were so evident and undeniable that they most find a way to justify a criminal sentence in spite of them by calling them sorcery, something that was a crime in Israel.

Please check:
Jesus of Nazareth on the Babylonian Talmud - Sanhedrin 43A-B foil

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light
As pointed out by andy, the shroud has been continually studied post-STURP with newer and better technology. There are articles from this year alone saying the same thing that scientists have said for years. It's hundreds, not thousands of years old. Not that I believe everything that mainstream academia says, as is evident from my post history, but it's hard to argue with them when what historical evidence we do have seems to agree with their assessment.

The shroud is an interesting artifact, and I would like to see more study done as to how it was created, but I really don't see that it has any religious significance other than what the church has (falsely) bestowed on it.

S&F for the update.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 05:33 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

Excuse me but your assertion is far to be precise, you are exaggerating the scope of an individual opinion by the way.

First at all the concept of a Bishop is not the official voice of the Holy see at any time, Do you know how many Bishops are in the whole Christendom?

Second, it is well known by the Historians that know that account of that particular XIII century Bishop of LIrey( Henry of Poiters, and also his successor Pierre de A'rcis )that he had personal interests and reasons to discredit the relic even if it was authentic.

He was extremely shocked and jealous of the popularity of the relic but moreover that the people that owed it at that time, the Charney clan, were Not paying him any portion of the collection from the exhibitions of the relic.

He was also losing income in his own cathedral due to the massive pilgrimage to visit the Shroud chapel in France instead.

What was the final outcome of that intrigue against the Charney family?

H.H the Pope Clement VII extremely doubtful of the validity of the accusation certainly banned for prudential reasons anybody from declaring the image authentic, but at the same time warned Bishop D'Arcis that he would pay the penalty of excommunication unless he stopped warring with the clergy at Lirey that supported the relic authenticity.

Now, coming to our time, and trusting on modern science instead of dubious medieval intrigues, STURP proven with sophisticate modern spectroscopy techniques as well as X rays analysis that the Shroud image is not a painting, nothing that is printed in any known way, so it can Not be a medieval falsification at all.

Please check:
Shroud of Turin Image is Holographic information

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

It's my understanding that the Catholic Church does not make any claim of authenticity but just presents the shroud and legend "as is." While it acknowledges the miracles like healing and answered prayers, they say that is a result of faith rather than any magic power the shroud might possess.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:07 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light


The "report" (the snippet of it posted in your OP, anyway) disqualifies itself from being taken seriously. It says that for certain, the image is of a scourged, crucified man.

There is NO WAY they can know whether the "man" in the shroud's image was crucified.

And I am a believer in Jesus Christ, mind you. I hate it when this type of thing gets allowed.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:16 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

DaVinci is just one of many artists, who were fully aware of the possibilities the camera obscura provides. It's essentially photography, yes. And you're mixing up the alleged fraud from the 14th century with the later version from the House of Savoy, which we still see today.

Also, there wasn't just one Holy Sea, there were three of them (as in "unholy trinity").

It would make a lot of sense to commission another fraud during that time, given the Western Schism with it's Anti-Popes in Pisa and Avignon. Savoy sits right in the middle, and they managed to play two superpowers of the Renaissance - France and Spain - like fiddles during their Italian Wars. Later on they even made Turin their capital, coincidences... I know...




posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: KansasGirl

If horrible marks of actual wounded writs with holes that drained a lot of body blood and the ones present on the feet, as well as, of a lot of scars and the bruise inflicted in the shoulders that only a heavy object can cause are not evidences of crucifixion then what do you suggest they were doing with that man?

Giving him the very special Roman beauty treatment perhaps, is that a satisfactory explanation for you?

Even if you are skeptical if it was or Not Jesus of Nazareth, how in the name of logic and reason you justify all those wounds in a different context?

Please check:
Reconstruction on 3D of the wounded Man's body of the Shroud

There were forensic specialists in the team of about 40 scientists that for 5 days, more than 140 hours of testing, examined the relic in 1978, so the people that is saying that are experts in different ways to perform homicides, those were not mere personal opinions but forensic evaluations.

Sorry, but I am astonished of your observation.

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:18 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Think I'll pass on Jesus of Nazareth on the Babylonian Talmud link. I've never studied the Talmud but from what I've seen here on ATS and elsewhere, what it has to say about Jesus is not compatible with the Christian faith.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: PublicOpinion

With all respect Science fiction I believe is another forum in ATS, I feel I am not wrong it actually exist somewhere, but there has been no single evidence of existence of any photography technique before the 1800s at all.

You can check any serious History of photography text and that is what you are going to find, so it is no sense and lose of time to try to look for another scientist inventing something literally out of any historic context, 5 centuries before it actually existed, are you going to tell me also a tale of time travel perhaps, it was a slider who painted the shroud?

By the way the two Bishops that opposed resistance to the Shroud veneration never mentioned any wise man or scientist, they attributed it to an artist, a common painter, and we know now from what STURP found that this is not a painting at all, so their accusations are clearly false.

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link   
a reply to: toms54

Yes it is clearly incompatible with Christian faith and reach the point of heretic statements, even blaspheme against the Holy Ghost perhaps, but that shows you the figure was pretty well known by Hebrew writers and historians who by the way never have tried to deny his historicity, another fiction that has emerged on our time among popular literature.

Even in the worst of his attacks against him, the Talmud writers treat Jesus as a very real figure that actually lived as a man but with extraordinary powers, they didn't deny those wonders He was able to perform.

Another portion of the Babylonian Talmud that traditionally is said refers to Jesus of Nazareth is Sanhedrin 107B, where he is portrayed as a disciple of the Rabbi Yoshua Parahjah again his paranormal powers are not hidden or denied, they are instead attributed to sorcery of some kind.

Here it is for the ones interested:

Sanhedrin 107B Babylonic Talmud account said to be of Jesus of Nazareth

Perhaps that mysterious power is the only possible explanation of the strange origin of the enigmatic image on this shroud.

Nevertheless, not all the Jewish Historians agree that the Talmud accounts actually refer to Jesus of Nazareth, in general they accept were systematically used to refute the messiah role of Christ in the past, but also suspect the different Yeshuas referred on that book were other figures from other times that were processed and executed.


The identification of Jesus with any number of individuals named Yeshu has numerous problems, as most of the individuals are said to have lived in time periods far detached from that of Jesus; Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Stada's stepfather is noted as speaking with Rabbi Akiva before his execution in c. 134 AD, Yeshu the sorcerer is noted for being executed by the royal government which lost legal authority in 63 BC, Yeshu the student was among the Pharisees who returned to Israel from Egypt in 74 BC. Still, during the Middle Ages, Ashkenazic Jewish authorities were forced to interpret these passages in relation to the Christian beliefs about Jesus of Nazareth. As historian David Berger observed,


Yeshua Ha Notzri is the figure of the Babylonian Talmud that possible resembles better aspects of the trial and execution of Jesus of Nazareth.

Please check:
deusdiapente.wordpress.com...

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:49 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Look it up?

en.wikipedia.org...

It's not very scientific to discard said camera, either, it has it's name for a reason. And there's lots of capable artists during that time, Donatello for example.
With 3 Popes eager to garner relics in order to legitimate their rule, I don't think it's a stretch to see this as a political item of sorts as well.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: The angel of light

Yes really.


I did not say Da Vinci made it, nor had anything to do with its creation but it may indeed have been an early attempt at photography. The modern forensic analysis, on the other hand, alludes to the time period the shroud was created.

So it's not Jesus or evidence of the existence of anything other than a funeral shroud to be honest.

Served its purpose to Christianity all the same.



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 06:53 PM
link   
This is what it really looks like when you lay a cloth on somebody's face:



posted on Nov, 1 2018 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

That depends completely on how do you wrap the body with it and also how do you tie the shroud the face, there are many different ways to do it.

We know by sure that his jaws very tied with the skull fixed with another cloth, that was the Hebrew burial tradition on the time of Christ.

Those wrinkles that your image contains are because you have not done your research homework correctly, I am sorry to disappoint you by the way.

How was wrapped Jesus of Nazareth in the Shroud

It was good try though.

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 11/1/2018 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)







 
16
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join