Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Scientists say Turin Shroud is Supernatural !!!

page: 16
47
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


" but it is my duty to tell you the truth."

Absolutely not. It is your duty to be faithful to your god, and to read scripture.

It is your God's duty to judge if that person deserves to go anywhere.

Grow up, and read your bible, and stop telling people where they will go..




posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by rhtverma
 


Unfortunately simply "believing" In Jesus is not enough and it will eventually lead you to hell. Now don't get upset with me for telling you that but it is my duty to tell you the truth. The reason its not enough to simply believe is because even the devil and his demons believe in Jesus. You need to love him with a desire to serve him and accept him into your life. Jesus Christ is the living most high God. Christianity is not just a religion; it is a relationship with God. It is a trusting in Jesus and what He did on the cross, not on what you can do for yourself. Going to church does not make you a Christian unlike what people believe. Buddha didn't rise from the dead, nor did Confucius or Zoroaster. Muhammad didn't fulfill detailed prophecy. Alexander the Great didn't raise the dead or heal the sick. And though there is far less reliable information written about them, people believed in them. Jesus is unique. He was either telling the truth, He was crazy, or He was a liar. But since everyone agrees that Jesus was a good man, how then could He be both good and crazy, or good and a liar? He had to be telling the truth. He is the only way.


Now don't get upset with me but Its : "Interview time"! :


Is hell up ,middle or below us. Location?

Are we always lead to the gate of hell if not involved in "blind jesus faith"?

How do you know the devil believes in jesus? Blind faith Scripture?

Why is the word "need" used so much. Do you know something else we don't?

Is that something else Faith?
Will faith make me understand the "need" dimension?

How do you know jesus is the most high loving god. Is this some holy boxing federation. Was there a previous"most high god" before jesus, and so forth and so forth? Or is jesus the first and only?

Isn't religion a relationship with that particular god. Why it in christianity different?

Don't muslims have a relationship with Allah too?

How do you know jesus did anything with a cross. Because of blind faith scripture?

Buddha nor Confucius ever claimed to be god. But they did claim they were AWAKE..SO why would they rise from the dead? Or were you talking about there souls?

Did you know Mithra rose from the dead, on Dec.25th, known as the "rebirth"? Supposedly

Did you know resurrection is a pagan concept which happens after the winter solstice.?


What do you mean "muhammad didn't fulfill detailed prophecy"?

How do you know Muhammad didn't exist? Because of blind faith scripture?

Do you blindly believe in the Quran also?

Did you know Alexander the Great never claimed to be Great nor God?

Did you know the God and Great branding of Alexander came after with the Romans?


Did you know Romans are known and great at re-writing "history"?


Did you know jesus's miracles and healing the sick are metaphors and supposed to be NOT taken seriously.?

Who agrees that jesus was a good or bad man? How do they know this? Because of blind holy scripture? If I tell you I am a good person, how would you know?


Please take your time answering these questions. I am writing a book and you just mite be the vital source for my book to reach #1 status.


All the best



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration

Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


No way is it a medieval hoax they didn't even have the technology to make such a thing back then.


I think you'd be surprised by the tricks real Alchemists had up their voluminous sleeves, back in the day.


Did you read the article? Scientists have proven that there is no way that could of created this in medieval times. Some how I don't think even the best Alchemists had high-intensity ultra violet lasers back in those days.
edit on 22-12-2011 by RevelationGeneration because: (no reason given)

Sounds like they recreated it one high tech way. Not that it couldn't be done otherwise:

.That's analagous to saying:" because it took giant mechanical cranes to build the empire state building;(Unavailable in Moses' time): The pyramids were built by extra terrestrials"(Perhaps "they" created "the shroud" later too?)

The One does not necessarily eliminate other methods...
edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2011 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by matadoor
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


" but it is my duty to tell you the truth."

Absolutely not. It is your duty to be faithful to your god, and to read scripture.

It is your God's duty to judge if that person deserves to go anywhere.

Grow up, and read your bible, and stop telling people where they will go..


Reminds me of a semi serious joke I wish I could find a link for again:Goes something like:

" So minister what about someone who never heard of this "God" ?Would they be sent to burn in hell for all eternity?
"Why uh no; of course not my son"...
" Then why did you tell me of him"?


Do you not now bear direct responsibility for your failure to convert me to a "follower"; perhaps if you just witnessed a little harder (?) Don't bother; I have come to my own concepts of the "divine"....

Or are you just a version of Gods' "Magazine subscription neighborhood crews"( "just get them to sign up! for one free issue after that they're trapped in automatic renewal hell!)



edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-12-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by dilly1
 


The lack of distortion of the facial features is a problem for any theory that claims this is anything other than an artistic man-made fabrication in my humble opinion.
edit on 12/28/2011 by Sparky63 because: added comment



I wouldnt waste too much time in trying to explain to him what it actually means since he doesnt really seem to be able to grasp the simple fact of it.A fact which as you know is stunningly undeniable.The depiction on the shroud has not been produced by a body that much is obvious precisely because of the lack of distortion.The theory brought up of it being tensioned over the face does not work either because the shroud show details that can not be transfered over to the cloth using that method and would hardly produce anything recognizable and would still suffer from said distortion ,albeit to a lesser degree.

Dilly is a bit stuck and stuck up on his beginners books of make believe ,has no hard evidence and is so far never prepared to question anything of it regardless of the fact that any of what he has claimed requires very critical thinking ,to say but the least.He is quite retarded in my opinion and i wont shun to express that.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Not seeing anything worthwhile on the fraud side.

Distortion will happen if it was wrapped around the head like a mummy. No one ever said this was the case, in fact seems common to just raise a covering above a persons head. I guess the shroud is real people would say the image is going through the shroud as though passing through like some kind of atomic reaction.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malcher
Not seeing anything worthwhile on the fraud side.

Distortion will happen if it was wrapped around the head like a mummy. No one ever said this was the case


Actually they did



, in fact seems common to just raise a covering above a persons head. I guess the shroud is real people would say the image is going through the shroud as though passing through like some kind of atomic reaction.


I pointed out more then once how that cannot produce any image even remotely ressembling the image on the shroud.

edit on 2-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_

Originally posted by Malcher
Not seeing anything worthwhile on the fraud side.

Distortion will happen if it was wrapped around the head like a mummy. No one ever said this was the case


Actually they did



, in fact seems common to just raise a covering above a persons head. I guess the shroud is real people would say the image is going through the shroud as though passing through like some kind of atomic reaction.


I pointed out more then once how that cannot produce any image even remotely ressembling the image on the shroud.

edit on 2-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


You may have stated it cannot be done but you certainly do not know this to be a fact.

Some things to consider:

Energy extension in three-dimensional atomic imaging by electron emission holography-
prl.aps.org...

The development of the laser enabled the first practical optical holograms that recorded 3D objects to be made in 1962-
en.wikipedia.org...

The wrap:

The "wrap" part is a non issue because it would need the shroud to be a specific way on the body.

I dont know how anyone can say with certainty how it was wrapped. Very likely the shroud was just pulled up over the head considering it was probably a temporary covering. Pretty sure this is what is done in morgues.

My point in the earlier response is ALL the explanations (from what i have read) in this thread have been brought up before and debunked easily so not worth to consider.
edit on 3-1-2012 by Malcher because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Oh, and to Revelation Generation, I leave you this little reminder....

Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things" (Romans 2:1).



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio
dam-it... the scientists got punked

the shroud was created by DaVinci with a bunch of aloes & oils etc and the camera-
Obscura technology



the dude is laughing...really laughing at his creating a 'super-natura'l effect


I have been putting overtime studying the shroud going on 2 years

I just couldnt resist joining because of the incredible ignorance that is shown about the shroud by skeptics. The davinci conspiracy theory had been debunked many years back and only people that are in denial still use that crackpot theory. Davinci was born in 1452. Even the faulty carbon dating tests debunk that theory, but lets take it a few steps further.

Historians were allready suspicious of the carbon dating because it didnt match with the history of the shroud. The hungarian pray codex has a pic of the shroud complete with the 3 burn holes and the specific herring bone weave on that pic. The hungarian pray codex was written in the late 11 century if my sources are still up to date (99% sure), but the real killer here is the sudarium of Oviedo which is kept in a church in spain. Forensice experts and others like the late Max Frie have confirmed that the body of the image on the shroud was the same body that the sudarium was wrapped around also. Experts have found many congruent points that make it unmistable that both of them wrapped around the head of the man on the image.

No one got punked but the pseudo skeptic here on the shroud.

More to come. I also almost finished another response but i accidently deleted it lol



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_

Originally posted by Malcher
Not seeing anything worthwhile on the fraud side.

Distortion will happen if it was wrapped around the head like a mummy. No one ever said this was the case


Actually they did



, in fact seems common to just raise a covering above a persons head. I guess the shroud is real people would say the image is going through the shroud as though passing through like some kind of atomic reaction.


I pointed out more then once how that cannot produce any image even remotely ressembling the image on the shroud.

edit on 2-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



This is what you wrote Rafe in another post

""one thing is for sure and that is that it never really was a shroud of anyone to begin with.

The image depicted can never be that of cloth thaty has been wrapped around a face.It simply would not match with what is shown on the shroud wich is simply a 2 dimensional depiction of a face as a face is seen in 3 dimensions from the front.

This is where the entire question on wether or not the shroud is for real or not should have ended the minute "experts" laid eyes on it imo.


Here is a Face wrap texture to demonstrate how it would have looked if it was real:"""




And this is why experts around the world havent called on you to debunk or prove the shrouds authenticity. Most scientists agree that the lack of major distortion is just one reason why this image wasnt produced by shroud to body contact. I wonder why you didnt even consider this possibility. Could it be a worldview problem or lack of research? For you to say that they should have known that it was a fraud when they laid eyes on it shows why they are still researching this and your still here posting nonsense like this.

It is not a painting, it couldnt have been done by any of the techniques that were proposed on this forum, and non of them will produce the xray and 3d topographical informatikn that the shroud has.

The person in this link is a little better acclimated to the research that has been done on the shroud.
asis.com...



The blood is real.

The image is of a man who was crucified.

The wounds are identical to those inflicted upon Jesus.

The scourge marks are historically consistent.

99 percent of scientists world wide who has studied the cloth up close, have found that is not a painting.

The process causing the yellowness of the top most fibers of the threads responsible for the image is unknown.

The shading quality of the image is more like the results of modern printing technology.

The shroud micrographs showed no residue of paint or powder.

If the image was created by contact, it would be grotesque and distorted, with the blood marks out of alignment.

The image is not produced by a contact process.

The image is complex, with photographic, three-dimensional and x-ray-like qualities.

The information indicates that this was a Jewish burial.

The faint flower images seen on the cloth are all flowers that grow in the Holy Land. These flowers bloom in spring at Passover time.

There are what appear to be shadows on the body image.

The hair falls down to the shoulders and the soles of the feet are seen on the shroud.

It appears that this dead man has been lifted from the position of burial and is now upright as if suspended in midair.

More to come in my next post if I dont accidently delete the info again lol



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_

Originally posted by Malcher
Not seeing anything worthwhile on the fraud side.

Distortion will happen if it was wrapped around the head like a mummy. No one ever said this was the case


Actually they did



, in fact seems common to just raise a covering above a persons head. I guess the shroud is real people would say the image is going through the shroud as though passing through like some kind of atomic reaction.


I pointed out more then once how that cannot produce any image even remotely ressembling the image on the shroud.

edit on 2-1-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)


part 2:THE WRAP, THE BLOOD, THE IMAGE

Dr. Lavoie says, “Now that I knew in that the shroud blood marks were a historical possibility, I decided to pursue the study of a blood mark that had always intrigued me: the off-the-body-image blood mark located at the left elbow. I did not have an explanation as to how this blood mark got to its off-image position. I have wondered what would happen if I placed the cloth over my own body. The location of the drape surprised me. The off-the-image blood mark was touching the back of my upper arm. The whole family began working on a full-size tracing of the left arm and off image blood mark. Once the tracing was completed, we then turned it over and laid it over one of us in the same way that we felt the shroud cloth had been laid upon the body. From this direct frontal view of the man, I noted that the off image blood mark was not visible. The shroud image is similar to a direct frontal photograph a man; it shows no sides. From this information, it becomes obvious that the off image blood mark was caused by the cloth touching the clot on the back of the upper arm as the cloth draped over the side of the body. At this point in the study, I realized that the other blood marks on the image translate into two-dimensional information, corresponding to the man’s height and width. However, the off-the-image blood mark is graphic evidence pointing to yet a third dimension – depth: a three dimensional figure had been under this cloth.

The clotted blood on the back of the upper arm represents a prior blood flow that followed the force of gravity. The origin of the blood flow likely started at a wrist wound, which is not visible, and flowed down the forearm, past the elbow, and around the back of the upper arm collecting in a round pool of blood on the underside of the arm.

Once I understood the process of how the Austin H. Bud Mark was formed, I realized that this information brought me to an appreciation of the difference between the production of the blood Marx and the creation of the image

Where the cloth touched the forearm, the image of the forearm can be seen, but where the cloth touched the back of the upper arm, there is no image. Therefore, image formation had nothing to do with the cloth touching skin or sweat products. I knew that in contrast to the blood marks, the body image was not created by a contact process. If it had been, an image of the upper arm would be seen extending out as far as the off-image blood mark.

In summary, this off-image blood mark told me three things about the shroud: (1) The shroud cloth had covered a three-dimensional figure of crucified man (2). A contact process made the blood marks. (3) The image was not made by a contact process.”


Dr. Lavoie's credentials

www.shroudofjesus.com...

Rafe, I think you will need to do more unbiased research on the shroud before posting dont you think?



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweetnlow
It was caused by a methane gas release while the body was cooking in the sun wrapped in the shroud.......end of story.


Another rediculous assumption not backed up with any rigorous research of knowledge.

www.shroudstory.com...

""The image is produced by some contact mechanism: As with a vapor theory, this mechanism requires a chemical reaction to cause a chemical change in the fabric. There are several problems, however. Even more so than with a vapor mechanism, is the problem of distortion because of the roundness of body parts, especially the face. Nor can the resulting image satisfy the 3-dimensionality criteria. The dorsal (backside) view would be more saturated because of the weight of the body and certain recessed parts of body would not be visible because they would fail to touch the cloth.""

How I yearn for a bit of rational and open minded research on the shroud. Again this is why science is leaning towards authenticity and the skeptics are posting such dribble.

No wonder why the best the skeptics could do is bring up a Jesus Sandwich. When any intellectual response fails and the evidence points to something outside of your worldview you can always resort to redicule, but then again this is when logic and reason arethrown out the door.



posted on Jan, 7 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
Lets take a more historical route now for the shroud.

Davinci is ruled out by even the flawed c-14 tests lol, and the hungarian pray codex.

there is no paint found on the image as evidence by none of the expertswith the top equipment in the world not finding any. You can find this info in peer reviewed research and articles.

Its not a photo.

It contains 3d topographical information as well as Dr Soons now finding holographic info on it.

The only guy that said he found paint on the image was the Water Mccrone and when he was asked to share his research with the rest of the scientists that found no paint on it he refused. Hethen tried to submit through the peer review process and when he saw it wouldnt pass muster with them he pulled it out and instead put his work in his own microscopy magazine of which he is the editor and owner.

The blood was formed by a contact process between the body and shroud while the image wasnt. The image was created by some rapid aging of the shroud which doesnt correspond to leaving it out in the sun lol. Blood came first, the image came second.

The blood stains on the shroud match in congruent points over both the shroud of turin and the sudarium of oviedo. The pollen found on the head image of the shroud and the sudarium of oviedo point to the same species of thorny bush found only in the jerusalem area.

The sudariums history going all the way back to at least the 600's is unchallenged by historians. The blood on the sudarium was that of a man that was still alive while the blood of the mans image on the shroud is that of a dead man. The sudarium matches perfectly with what is called a swet cloth in that time. It is a cloth to cover the head of a victim in which his face and head had been brutalized and was too brutal for oncoming crowds to view.

The burial fit with the 1st century burial customs as was talked about by numerous experts. One being debbie jackson, the wife of John jackson of Nasa who was an orthodox jew before she studied the shroud and converted to christianity after she studied the shroud.

Folks just dont look at my posts or the posts of any skeptics at face value. Delve deeper into the study of the shroud. It could be the most important thing that you have ever done in your lives.

I could go on forever as I have studied this relic for over 2 years but that would take the fun out of the journey here wouldnt it?

What did Our lord say? SEEK AND YOU SHALL FIND?

I hope this helps folks

These could be my last posts here for a while as im pretty busy these days
God bless u all



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


Interesting. I agree with some other posters that more research needs to be conducted by scientists around the world as to form a consistent, proven experiment. If true, however, it would provide very few possible explanations....supernatural, extraterrestrial, or forgotten technology being the only three I can think of. In any case it's curious.

The supernatural explanation stands on its own merit. The ET angle is very possible but very complicated. The forgotten technology angle is what I find the most implausible but I can't rule out the possibility. The fact that scientists proved that it could not be done in the middle ages proves only that it cannot be recreated from what we know. I agree with another poster regarding a possible alchemical connection. That "science" is poorly understood even today and is viewed as the precursor to chemistry. Who really knows what has been lost in the ash heap of history. One example, though unrelated, is Greek Fire. Even today the recipe for this concoction is unknown and the subject of much speculation.

reply to post by verschickter
 




At first, I dont like it if you call me "you people". I could say the same about "you people" (the wonderous ones) but I dont. I dont need to think in boxes.

Second, why not? Whats your problem with it? See I have no problem with both theories, as they are theories.
And guess what, for me its more presumably to think that in the millions of years on the millions of stars that at least one other civilisation has evolved. More likley to believe it was tech then supernatural. Sorry.

Edit: So my explanation, it were ETs and their beam to move jesus (an ET) to their craft used UV light.
Second Edit: If you like to turn your own thread into a page long endless discussion about pro or contra, go on. If not just stop insulting other people for their different view. God would be mad at you


Are you seriously saying that you consider "you people" an insult? Wow...just, wow. I read what you replied too and it was not insulting in any way...although extreme. "You people" is a phrase that is used as a tool to get a point across easily. It is not thinking in boxes. I stand amazed at how people let a simple combination of two words, neither offensive, cause distress. I try my best to see things from many points of view but I have no shame in admitting that I am lost in this case. All I see is indignant self-importance.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by My_Reality
reply to post by RevelationGeneration
 


Interesting. I agree with some other posters that more research needs to be conducted by scientists around the world as to form a consistent, proven experiment. If true, however, it would provide very few possible explanations....supernatural, extraterrestrial, or forgotten technology being the only three I can think of. In any case it's curious.

The supernatural explanation stands on its own merit. The ET angle is very possible but very complicated. The forgotten technology angle is what I find the most implausible but I can't rule out the possibility. The fact that scientists proved that it could not be done in the middle ages proves only that it cannot be recreated from what we know.


I've already posted regarding this, but I feel I need to repeat this again. Here's the quote from the OP:


"The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin," they said.


In short, UV light can color objects, or cause discoloration. That's the content of the statement and I find it rather blind and uninteresting.

An intense burst of UV can change the color of cloth. Just leave out a piece to dry, and keep it on the clothing line for days, and you'll see it with your own eyes. No miracles there.

Same can be achieved with chemical substances. I do my own laundry and on occasion a drop of bleach falls onto my jeans... Bummer! I can assure you my jeans are not supernatural. There is plenty of substances that can cause the color to change...



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by trustnothing
more lies, the catholic church really dont want to let this go do they? It was proven by Oxford that it was a fake created in the middle ages, making up lies like this is the only press coverage they can get which doesn't involve child abuse.


This whole statement is false. Oxford proved that the part of the cloth they used was indeed from the middle ages. However, it has since been discovered, and widely accepted, that the part that they examined came from the restored part of the cloth. The shroud itself was burnt in a fire and restored in during the same time period in which cloth they used was determined to be from. Since then, they have discovered fibers that come from a plant native to Israel during the 1st century A.D. on the shroud. However, the Catholic church has taken steps to preserve the shroud which make it impossible to test today. So, mystery unsolved.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555

Originally posted by trustnothing
more lies, the catholic church really dont want to let this go do they? It was proven by Oxford that it was a fake created in the middle ages, making up lies like this is the only press coverage they can get which doesn't involve child abuse.


This whole statement is false. Oxford proved that the part of the cloth they used was indeed from the middle ages. However, it has since been discovered, and widely accepted, that the part that they examined came from the restored part of the cloth. The shroud itself was burnt in a fire and restored in during the same time period in which cloth they used was determined to be from.


I saw a TV program on that topic and that whole restoration thing is far from certain. I would agree that a few samples from different parts of the shroud would have been more conclusive, but that's hardly possible.

And you know what, that's beside the point. The OP is about the significance of UV to color change in some fabrics, and again I posit that it's fairly irrelevant much less evidence for some "supernatural" feature of the shroud.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 09:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by Ryanp5555

Originally posted by trustnothing
more lies, the catholic church really dont want to let this go do they? It was proven by Oxford that it was a fake created in the middle ages, making up lies like this is the only press coverage they can get which doesn't involve child abuse.


This whole statement is false. Oxford proved that the part of the cloth they used was indeed from the middle ages. However, it has since been discovered, and widely accepted, that the part that they examined came from the restored part of the cloth. The shroud itself was burnt in a fire and restored in during the same time period in which cloth they used was determined to be from.


I saw a TV program on that topic and that whole restoration thing is far from certain. I would agree that a few samples from different parts of the shroud would have been more conclusive, but that's hardly possible.

And you know what, that's beside the point. The OP is about the significance of UV to color change in some fabrics, and again I posit that it's fairly irrelevant much less evidence for some "supernatural" feature of the shroud.


Well at this juncture, I completely agree with you. I think you can completely discredit this study merely based on the potential bias involved. I would need neutral scientists from other countries to do multiple studies and come to the same conclusion AND THEN have multiple historians, or people who were the experts on this field of study, come out and say that we have no knowledge of any technique available at that time which could produce these results.

To me, what they have done, is speculated on something in which they don't actually have a working knowledge of. These scientists have said its X and X wasn't around then. But, they don't have a working knowledge of whether or not X was actually around then, as they haven't spent their life studying it. This is sort of off topic but it reminds me of Steven Hawking saying that if aliens came to earth they would likely want to attack it and harvest the earth for resources, or whatever. Yet, Mr. Hawking has no place to speaking about an alien's psychology. In fact, I would argue that Mr. Hawking likely isn't too adept at human psychology by saying that because the closest thing he'd have to understanding alien psychology would be human psychology. If you ask me, I'd say if humans found life on another planet, and had the means to get there, we'd study the aliens, not attack and kill them. I think as our intelligence has grown, we've come to respect other living things more. But, I digress.

The point of my original post was because the other person was dismissive of the shroud based on the original carbon dating test that they did. However, there have been, as you point out, enough questions to call the original testing into doubt. Just as this study has too many questions surrounding it to say that its valid.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ryanp5555
This is sort of off topic but it reminds me of Steven Hawking saying that if aliens came to earth they would likely want to attack it and harvest the earth for resources, or whatever. Yet, Mr. Hawking has no place to speaking about an alien's psychology. In fact, I would argue that Mr. Hawking likely isn't too adept at human psychology by saying that because the closest thing he'd have to understanding alien psychology would be human psychology.


I don't think you quite got the message. It was not about how the aliens are definitely going to be bloodthirsty maniacs. It's about the downside risk, in case they actually are. Let's say there is 85% chance that aliens are rich and benevolent hippies who cruise the Universe to cure cancer and give away cases of champagne. The remaining 15% is the chance that they will be like hi-tech Texas Chainsaw Massacre type of guys. The idea is that enormous benefits of the 85% do not outweigh certain extinction of human species in the other 15%.

So if Dr. Hawking is not an expert in alien psyche, he says that whatever the percentage is, it's too damn risky to consider this. It's like playing russian roulette for $1M. A lot of people would do it, but the conservative and prudent type won't.


If you ask me, I'd say if humans found life on another planet, and had the means to get there, we'd study the aliens, not attack and kill them.


Human history is abundant with examples of opposite sort of behavior.


The point of my original post was because the other person was dismissive of the shroud based on the original carbon dating test that they did. However, there have been, as you point out, enough questions to call the original testing into doubt. Just as this study has too many questions surrounding it to say that its valid.


Yes, but at least the study demonstrated a non-zero probability that the shroud is modern. That whole "mending" of the shroud is actually a hypothesis in and by itself.





new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join