Scientists say Turin Shroud is Supernatural !!!

page: 14
47
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:26 PM
link   
I have to say i really despair seeing the way a lot of you "interact" or "debate" in threads. Nobody ever seems to post any links or really anything to back up what they are saying, things that are of interest to help learn new things from all sides and progress a debate.

i found this article which i found interesting, talking a bit about the history of the "debate" between peer reviewed scientists in different high quality peer reviewed journals.

www.shroudstory.com...

here are a few snippets which i hope (but doubt) will maybe lessen some of the wild theories and claims people try to force unto others. So please read the article, read the evidence for yourself and come to your own conclusions about the information presented. Here are just a few snippets that people should really consider or think about:

**the theory of it being related to Jacques De Molay is very interesting so i will be reading more about that as soon as im done here. having read the article first without that in mind i didnt notice a couple of interesting things that seem to jump out more now that that info is known to my brain**

". McCrone, having noted that the shroud had suddenly appeared in 1356 in the hands of a French knight who would not say where it came from and that a local bishop soon thereafter claimed that an artist “cunningly painted” it, declared it a painted fake. "

now as you read more it seems that it is accepted that its not a painted fake, but the whole thing about the date and the french knight makes me want to read more about the De Molay theory. Also this:

"The same year that the Shroud was first displayed publicly in the small French village of Lirey, "

so if i understand it right the shroud was only ever known to exist after the 1300's? and it appeared from France which doesn't really make me lean towards the Jesus side of things. I haven't looked more into the shroud's known existence history so could I be wrong, it's just what seems to be said from the article. Combined with the information provided just below it:

"the Pope was not in the eternal city. In this climate of superstition, naiveté and disorder a lucrative market in false relics flourished. And though the Fourth Lateran Council, in 1215, acknowledged the problem, church authorities did little to curb the market in them. Our knowledge of this time in history rightly conditions us to be suspicious of any relic that might appear in Europe at this time"

so the shroud emerged from France at a time when fake relics were a major problem:
" The year 1356 was a time of unbridled superstition in demons, witches, magic, and miracle-working relics. It was a time of frequent famine and the Black Death plague. It was a time of extreme economic and political turbulence and of war."

so if it really did emerge from France in the 1300's then my initial feelings is that its unlikely to be Jesus and over 2k years old, unless someone can point to it being known far further back in history than that. Certainly seems more likely to be a much more modern piece, real or fake, dating from around the 1300's, but as we go on the article has more interesting points.


KEY POINTS FOR ALL THE UV ENTHUSIASTS:

"Starting in 2003, new evidence began to appear in secular, peer-reviewed, scientific journals that supported the Shroud of Turin's authenticity. From these journals we learn that the outermost fibers of the cloth are coated with a layer of starch fractions and various saccharides. In places, the coating has turned into a caramel-like substance, thus forming the images. This suggests a chemical reaction took place. "

"hypothesis that the Shroud of Turin's image is the result of a very natural, complex chemical reaction between amines (ammonia derivatives) emerging from a body and saccharides within a carbohydrate residue that covers the fibers of the Shroud of Turin. The color producing chemical process is called a Maillard reaction. This is fully discussed in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, Melanoidins, a journal of the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (EU, Volume 4, 2003). The proposal, by chemist Raymond E. Rogers and Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, is hypothetical. But the chemical and physical nature of the Shroud of Turin's images is pure scientific fact."

also this:
"In selective places, an otherwise clear layer of starch fractions and saccharides, a mere 200 to 600 nanometers thick, as thin as the wall of a soap bubble, has undergone a chemical change into a caramel colored substance. Spectral and chemical analysis reveal that the chromophores of the Shroud of Turin's images are complex, conjugated carbon bonds."

so i have no idea what effect using UV to burn images has, but if UV can burn an image onto something 200-600 nanometers thick then WOW. So, if i was to be presented with 2 options, 1) UV burned image from supernatural source or 2) A very normal chemical reation, i know which id believe
edit on 23-12-2011 by Equ1nox because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   
continued:

TO ALL YOU CARBON DATING "END OF STORY" PEOPLE:

"In January, 2005, things changed. An article appeared in a peer-reviewed scientific journal Thermochimica Acta, which proved that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was flawed because the sample used was invalid."

" The art of invisible reweaving, Benford and Marino discovered, was commonly used in the Middle Ages to repair tapestries. Why not the shroud, they thought? They believed they saw evidence of it. "

". He also showed, with chemistry, that the shroud was at least thirteen hundred years old. And he proved, beyond any doubt, that the sample used in 1988 was chemically unlike the rest of the shroud. The samples were invalid. The 1988 tests were thus meaningless"

Basically ,as posted by a user on page 10, it seems that the area of cloth that was carbon dated was different to the rest of the cloth and seems to have been taken from an area that was repaired in medieval times, which resulted in the belief that it was medieval.

another UV related point:
"a 2003 article in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Melanoidins by Rogers and Anna Arnoldi, a chemistry professor at the University of Milan, demonstrated that the images were in fact a chemical caramel-like darkening of an otherwise clear starch and polysaccharide coating on some of the shroud’s fibers"

So, take from all that what you will, i like debates, i like progressing debates, perhaps narrowing the field as you try to learn more about something. But reading endless pages of some of the nonsense posted in this thread with absolutely no information or reading to back it up is just like going round and round in circles. You can all argue as much as you like and try to discredit each other, but the truth is, if you want to make a claim then at least provide something to back it up or give us something interesting to read in order to learn more about your side of thinking
edit on 23-12-2011 by Equ1nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Equ1nox
 


Dude, yes, there was an episode on Discovery channel about that.

I'm sure I'll sound as a broken record here but still -- can we please focus on the actual content of the OP?

Which is, a few people bleached a piece of fabric with UV light.

To which my reaction is, "what else is new?". My hair was getting bleached every summer since I was born, by the bright sunlight, and to the best of my knowledge there was no divine power involved.

I mean, there is no science and/or news involved here. The question of the Shroud's authenticity or lack thereof, and other collateral issues, if completely beside the point. Light can bleach organic fibers. Yes. So?

For me, the length and intensity of this thread is, unfortunately, an evidence of further decline of the ATS quality. I can't believe we can discuss made-up issues like this one, for such a long time. Light bleaches fabric, as humans have known for millenia.. Yawn. What's there to debate? Nothing, unless you are a really dumb person.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
it was quite painful going through the 13 pages to check what was said before i posted. There's so many incredibly intelligent people here on ATS it just seems that you have to almost filter out the spam now to try and keep in line with the real smart debate that tries to still live. The shame really is that, like i experience endless times out in the real world, people just dont seem to be willing to have an interesting discussion about different ideas and be open and listen to different things. Everything always seems to end up with one person trying to force another person to believe their path.


edit on 24-12-2011 by Equ1nox because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masterjaden
reply to post by verschickter
 


The opposite would then also be true, how could an atheist scientist research potential paranormal (hate that term anything that is possible is normal) phenomena without bias, in fact it's obvious that they do have bias in many cases with the crap explanations they try to use to explain away certain phenomena...

Jaden


It is quite simple really.
Religion does not require proof but faith so a religious scientist investigating such things is a bit iffy by default.
A atheist scientist would not be too bothered to say it is something they cannot explain yet.A religious scientist is far more likely to contribute it to something divine/religious as soon as they cannot find/see a explanation for something.



edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by secretagentwomyn
reply to post by dilly1
 


Dude! Stop calling "everyone" idiots. You automatically include yourself and myself in there and I know I am NOT an idiot.

Here's another way you could post your comment (I'm assuming you lack the tact to do so based on 2 previous "IDIOT" posts.)

Hey ya'll I heard a while back the name was Molay check out this link ----> www.rumormillnews.com...

He states " Bradford University lecturer Robert Lomas and colleague Christopher
Knight claim they can link science and history to prove that the face on the
shroud is that of a priest whose followers helped Scotland to win independence
from England in the 14th century.

"The scientific facts leave me in no doubt," says Dr Lomas, a physicist
who now lectures in Information Systems. "The cloth was used to wrap Jacques de
Molay, the leader of a monastic order known as the Knights Templar and whose
followers were given refuge by Robert the Bruce."


Now grow up and approach a discussion with tact so you can get people to actually learn instead of feeling attacked. No one wants to look up something when they've been called an idiot.


Wonderful,,,, someone with an actual brain but with very thin skin. Need to toughen up a bit bud. I can only imagine if we were face to face how would you really act. How you think I am calling myself idiot is a bit off.

My first two posts were normal . It wasn't until the smart people here in ATS started posting jargon that had no bases nor could logic be applied to how and why the image is genuine or supernatural. Even the heading of the thread is pathetic.

Back to the point. Molay is the shroud of Turin. I hope everyone else finally realizes that there is no hidden supernatural anything involved with a piece of cloth filled with blood and sweat from a man that lived in the 14th century.


So everyone listen up, NO need for carbon dating. And any ways carbon dating is flawed to begin with.


Have a wonderful day



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   


I don't expect any atheist to believe it so this thread isn't for you... For everyone else I'd like to hear what you have to say!
Erm does this mean that you can only reply to you if you agree with your views on religion?Therefore where is the debate?Im pretty sure you cannot tell anyone on here not to post in a thread or voice there opinion.We need a mod here methinks



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by autowrench
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


I take it you are familiar with the name Jacques de Molay?


Although historically there is little if any record of exactly how de Molay was tortured, Lomas and Knight have no doubt. Very shortly after his arrest France's Grand Inquisitor Guillaume Imbert put him through a blow-by-blow re- enactment of Jesus's crucifixion. First he was scourged. Then a crown of thorns was thrust on his head. Then nails were hammered into his wrists and feet, pinning him to 'a roughly assembled cross', on which he was hung in agony for several hours. Brought down alive, a knife was then thrust into his side 'not deep enough to cause life-threatening damage but sufficient to complete the deliberate re-enactment of the suffering of the 'son of God'. Finally the Grand Inquisitor apparently thought of 'one more amusing twist' to this scenario. In Knight and Lomas's own words:

He [Guillaume Imbert] has de Molay placed on the very burial shroud that Molay used to mock the Messiah. As the torturers laid him face upwards on the cloth and the excess section is lifted over his head to cover the front of his body, Imbert cannot resist a final quotation from the story of the Passion: 'And when Joseph had taken the body, he wrapped it in a clean linen cloth.' Patting the shroud around the desperately damaged body, Imbert suggests that the barely conscious man might care to raise himself, if he feels as important as the true Christ.

As Knight and Lomas go on: The features of de Molay's body were [then] etched onto the cloth by the lactic acid from the free-flowing blood, reacting with the frankincense used as a whitening agent, which was rich in calcium carbonate. Yes, you have now guessed it, this is really how the Turin Shroud was created. Its image is neither of Jesus, nor of Leonardo da Vinci, but of Jacques de Molay - the Templar Grand Master, who died alongside the Templar Geoffrey de Charney in 1314. According to Knight and Lomas, De Molay' was revived from his crucifixion (necessary because historically he was publicly burnt at the stake with Geoffrey de Charney), and then the image-bearing cloth that he had so involuntarily created: ... travelled ... to the home of Geoffrey de Charney, where it was washed, folded up, and placed in a drawer. Exactly fifty years later, in 1357, this fourteen-foot-long piece of linen was taken out of store and put on public display in Livey [sic] Of course there is not a scrap of hard evidence to support all this, but just in case of such doubts Knight and Lomas provide a pictorial 'clincher'. In their words: The long nose, the hair beyond shoulder-length with a centre parting, the full beard that forked at its base, and the fit-looking six-foot frame all perfectly match the known image of the last Grand Master of the Knights Templar.
source

Further, Carbon-dating has proved the Shroud is only some 1200 years old, nowhere near 2000 years old.

Turin Shroud link with Templars proved by archives, claims historian

The Templars and the Shroud of Turin

The Nature of the Body Images on the Shroud of Turin (PDF File)


Also very unlikely.The image on the shroud can never be of a persons face wrapped in a shroud since the print from his face would come out completly distorted once it is viewed flat and straight on,

this is the shroud:
www.world-mysteries.com...


If it was indeed a shroud wrapped around someones face it would have produced a image much like this:
i39.tinypic.com...




This alone has invalided the entire lore around the shroud since day one.
edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 03:15 PM
link   




Your example(i39.tinypic.com...) of a what seems would really happen if a shroud laid on top of person is so freakin amateur. Thank god your not a certified professional in anything.

The Molay theory is the only suitable option. You have actual written account(s) of someone brutally being tortured then covered. You continuously forget he was drenched in sweat mixed with blood. But its ok to continue thinking its a complete fraud only to convince the blind its an image of christ.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by dilly1
 


You conveniently forget, as his form of death...he was BURNED AT THE STAKE.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by dilly1
 


So you are saying that in the comparison pictures i posted that that is not how a imprint in a shroud of someones face would look like once you unwrap it?

Because that would be a astonishingly ignorant claim.


Just for your information.My 'amateuristic' picture is a facial texture made to fit around the 3d model once it gets wrapped around it without distorting it.

I dont care if you story about the torture is true (wich as it happens has never been proven anywhere).I made the point that a shroud like the turin shroud can never be produced by wrapping cloth around a 3 dimensional body ,wether your story is fake or not.


Imagine wrapping something around your face and being able to see the imprint afterwards.Now imagine unwrapping it,where do the ears and cheek bones and up according to you ?

You really believe you get a image as if you took a picture standing infront of someone? If yes ,go back to elementary school.


Good job on missing the point entirely.



edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dilly1
 


Oh trust me, I don't have thin skin ...I was just assuming you did since you were calling everyone idiots. I mean if you want to appear intelligent you have to be patient and keep your calm especially with people of lesser intelligence. It is simply a measure of intelligence to show calmness when these types provoke you.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_

Also very unlikely.The image on the shroud can never be of a persons face wrapped in a shroud since the print from his face would come out completly distorted once it is viewed flat and straight on,

this is the shroud:
www.world-mysteries.com...


If it was indeed a shroud wrapped around someones face it would have produced a image much like this:
i39.tinypic.com...


This alone has invalided the entire lore around the shroud since day one.
edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


Excellent! Occam's razor.



posted on Dec, 24 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Rafe_
 


Originally posted by Rafe_




Also very unlikely.The image on the shroud can never be of a persons face wrapped in a shroud since the print from his face would come out completly distorted once it is viewed flat and straight on,

this is the shroud:
www.world-mysteries.com...


If it was indeed a shroud wrapped around someones face it would have produced a image much like this:
i39.tinypic.com...


This alone has invalided the entire lore around the shroud since day one.
edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


The first image is the negative image. The second image is a wrap around a spherical object. It would look somewhat similar to that if the body was wrapped like a mummy but not if the sheet was pulled over like a blanket or sheet.

Still, the issue revolves more around HOW it was done and who had the knowledge, at that time, to do it. In time this may get figured out but up until now i dont think it has been reproduced to the point where it meets all the specifications of the original.

Recently someone made a reproduction using basically identical materials. The way he did this was some type of photographic method BUT he also used a paint medium. If that is inaccurate someone feel free to correct it.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by dilly1
 


You conveniently forget, as his form of death...he was BURNED AT THE STAKE.


Your kidding me! I had no recollection. Lol


Listen child, De Molay was tortured like jesus then burned.

And your point is???


The cloth came into play between both events.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dilly1

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by dilly1
 


You conveniently forget, as his form of death...he was BURNED AT THE STAKE.


Your kidding me! I had no recollection. Lol



You dont remeber? We roasted marshmellows.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_
reply to post by dilly1
 


So you are saying that in the comparison pictures i posted that that is not how a imprint in a shroud of someones face would look like once you unwrap it?

Because that would be a astonishingly ignorant claim.


Just for your information.My 'amateuristic' picture is a facial texture made to fit around the 3d model once it gets wrapped around it without distorting it.

I dont care if you story about the torture is true (wich as it happens has never been proven anywhere).I made the point that a shroud like the turin shroud can never be produced by wrapping cloth around a 3 dimensional body ,wether your story is fake or not.


Imagine wrapping something around your face and being able to see the imprint afterwards.Now imagine unwrapping it,where do the ears and cheek bones and up according to you ?

You really believe you get a image as if you took a picture standing infront of someone? If yes ,go back to elementary school.


Good job on missing the point entirely.



edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


What comparisons? All you have is biased studies(if that). What pictures, there was like 3. And one was a 3D cartoon.

Do you really think the Hiram Key is the only source of the templar's and De Molay's torture? Please try reading books ,stop with the internet. Read As many books as you can . You will learn . I promise.


Who said the shroud was wrapped? For starters There could have been easily more then one cloth. Try Doing some research . One can truly understand how life was in those times. Drop the hollywood mentality.

Yes your are right I am the one that is ignorant.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcher
reply to post by Rafe_
 


Originally posted by Rafe_




Also very unlikely.The image on the shroud can never be of a persons face wrapped in a shroud since the print from his face would come out completly distorted once it is viewed flat and straight on,

this is the shroud:
www.world-mysteries.com...


If it was indeed a shroud wrapped around someones face it would have produced a image much like this:
i39.tinypic.com...


This alone has invalided the entire lore around the shroud since day one.
edit on 24-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


The second image is a wrap around a spherical object. It would look somewhat similar to that if the body was wrapped like a mummy but not if the sheet was pulled over like a blanket or sheet.



Not possible my friend.It would however be a way to do it without creating a distorted print of a face but you see, that explanation has the problem that the cloth could not be bend around the face too much in order not to produce any highly noticeable distortion.It would also leave out most of the details that the shroud of turin portrait like the hair and the way its style seems to be preserved somehow or the detail/presence of ears.If done like you suggested and tension cloth over the top of the face it would have left large blank areas around every protruding shape in the face.

Note that to compensate for any such distortion produced in such case the final image will have to be made a X amount thinner to resemble that wich it was used on as realistic as possible.



edit on 25-12-2011 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by dilly1
What comparisons? All you have is biased studies(if that). What pictures, there was like 3. And one was a 3D cartoon.

Do you really think the Hiram Key is the only source of the templar's and De Molay's torture? Please try reading books ,stop with the internet. Read As many books as you can . You will learn . I promise.


Who said the shroud was wrapped? For starters There could have been easily more then one cloth. Try Doing some research . One can truly understand how life was in those times. Drop the hollywood mentality.

Yes your are right I am the one that is ignorant.







I am sorry but i have to say it,The lack of intelligence you manage to portrait is astonishing if nothing but comical.



posted on Dec, 25 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_

Originally posted by dilly1
What comparisons? All you have is biased studies(if that). What pictures, there was like 3. And one was a 3D cartoon.

Do you really think the Hiram Key is the only source of the templar's and De Molay's torture? Please try reading books ,stop with the internet. Read As many books as you can . You will learn . I promise.


Who said the shroud was wrapped? For starters There could have been easily more then one cloth. Try Doing some research . One can truly understand how life was in those times. Drop the hollywood mentality.

Yes your are right I am the one that is ignorant.







I am sorry but i have to say it,The lack of intelligence you manage to portrait is astonishing if nothing but comical.


Ahh,,, is my 3rd grade english too sophisticated for you to understand?





new topics
top topics
 
47
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join