Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Shroud of Turin is Probably Real

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnorantSpecies
There are a few things we need to look at..

Firstly the Shroud of Turin is re creatable, its creation was not magical as some people may claim.


No one has re-created it with all the characteristics already known from studying the shroud. The 3D image is the insurmountable feat; there are absolutely no other known instances of such a phenomenon...none at all. It is essentially something like a hologram, whose information is retrievable through a 2D photograph of the image containing the holographic information (on the shroud).

Read that again and let it sink in.

And haven't you ever heard of Arthur C. Clark's 3rd Law?
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Right now....it IS magic...and back in the days of the Civil War on back, going to the moon would have been magic.
Perspective and perception is all anything is, materially speaking.


Secondly, carbon dating is not the best thing with a subject like the Shroud because it has been suggested that there may be different parts to the shroud that have been added at different times.


That's already been proven, actually. But the Vatican won't release any more samples from elsewhere on the shroud for testing...and has also called back all samples already in the field from previous testing.


Thirdly, even if it is from the era we are claiming that this is the shroud that Jesus wore which is crazy. We do not even know if Jesus existed and there were millions of people in that era it becomes statistically impossible for it to belong to the one person we claim.


Well, in truth, it isn't really important who Jesus was, as a person, when it comes to the implications of the shroud being authentic and somehow produced by a blast of light as hot as the sun yet not crisping the whole thing into ash...it is about divine technology just out of our reach as humans...it's not a reason to worship a man, a human...something we should not do, imo...but rather a reason to consider perhaps that just maybe there is such a thing as what we call GOD...a higher mind and superior intellect that is the root and source of our human mind...something that we all have a part in whether we ascribe to a man named Jesus or not...the words of Jesus are invaluable gems...love your neighbor and your enemy, too...judge not, etc.,...but LIFE comes from something greater than the words or the Word...the place where the thought that gave rise to those words originated.

Whomever was transformed into pure light energy in the making of this image on the shroud, if indeed that is the only persistent conclusion of science...was transformed by something we do not fully fathom.


Lets also take a look at the people making the claim.
We are talking about the church, this is not good for the claim because over the centuries the church have proved themselves to not be trustworthy and people who will lie and manipulate to spread their business.


Ah! But the Church (RCC) makes no claims about the shroud and never has. From Wiki:

The Catholic Church has neither formally endorsed nor rejected the shroud, but in 1958 Pope Pius XII approved of the image in association with the Roman Catholic devotion to the Holy Face of Jesus.


There has been a continual interest in the shroud by at least small numbers ever since it came into the public view. Now, that perpetual curiosity is infiltrating the science community as well as many other arts/interests.

Here are a couple articles address the scientific interest in the shroud in our modern time:
Scientists, religious scholars to present Shroud of Turin findings
Science Sides with Religion

A slideshow at Discovery.com, with some quick facts in an easy to view format...


A page full of books and publications on the authenticity of the shroud from a scientific perspective:
Books on the Shroud of Turin

The deeper the scientific inquiry goes, the more unanswerable the question is, of the shroud's origins/creation.

To me, it almost seems as if the RCC wants the truth hidden, whatever it is...especially after calling back all specimens taken for testing.
The rest of us who are interested just want to know that truth, like I said, whatever it is.




posted on Apr, 7 2012 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by queenannie38
 



No one has re-created it with all the characteristics already known from studying the shroud. The 3D image is the insurmountable feat; there are absolutely no other known instances of such a phenomenon...none at all.

Actually the 3D qualities of the shroud have been recreated many times.
One of the best methods (known in the era the shroud is said to have been from) is using a reverse press.

I am trying to find the video now but what you do is draw an image on a piece of cloth in a very fine pigment dust, and then press it onto the Shroud to create a perfect 3d image. There are some other small steps but you get the gist of it.

So your claims are already exposed as either being lies or that you are not knowledgeable about the subject.



That's already been proven, actually. But the Vatican won't release any more samples from elsewhere on the shroud for testing...and has also called back all samples already in the field from previous testing.

What has been proven?
The carbon dating is inaccurate because we do not know the subject, for all we know the church could have given us samples from a completely different artifact from the era.
Until there is transparent scientific research done then we can not be sure.
Even then it would prove very little.



Well, in truth, it isn't really important who Jesus was

Well in the sense that we are jumping to conclusions as to who the Shroud was worn by yes it does. People see one thing and assume it must have been Jesus which is incredibly stupid. Fair enough if we even knew the guy existed but cmon you cant just claim things like that when there were millions of people who died in that era, most having similar burial techniques.



it is about divine technology just out of our reach as humans

No its really not.



but rather a reason to consider perhaps that just maybe there is such a thing as what we call GOD

For such a huge claim a simple piece of cloth is not going to do it.
In fact in a statistical manner it would actually be more likely it was the work of aliens then some creator of the universe.



Whomever was transformed into pure light energy in the making of this image on the shroud, if indeed that is the only persistent conclusion of science...was transformed by something we do not fully fathom.

This is not what happened.
It is not the only conclusion unless of course you have been paid by the Vatican.



Ah! But the Church (RCC) makes no claims about the shroud and never has.

Well it doesn't need to, exactly how religions they get their followers to spread the word for them.
You and I both know the church has highly vested interests in the Shroud of Turin because it helps them to create more profit.


The links you have posted don't really explain much.


Of course the church doesn't want people to work out it is not real. Think about it, if they actually had real proof of god do you really think they wouldn't share it with the world?
There one downfall is the not having evidence to back up their claims part.

When you look at the church, and how religions operate in general you will understand that the last people you want to take your information from are them and the scientists they enlist to research something.

edit on 7-4-2012 by IgnorantSpecies because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnorantSpecies
Actually the 3D qualities of the shroud have been recreated many times.
One of the best methods (known in the era the shroud is said to have been from) is using a reverse press.

I am trying to find the video now but what you do is draw an image on a piece of cloth in a very fine pigment dust, and then press it onto the Shroud to create a perfect 3d image. There are some other small steps but you get the gist of it.

So your claims are already exposed as either being lies or that you are not knowledgeable about the subject.


Yes, I am familiar with what you are referring to...that is, if it is Prof. Garlaschelli's attempt in 2009?

There are 13 scientifically confirmed characteristics of the shroud's image, found here.

No efforts to reproduce the shroud have yet met all 13 of those criteria.

Also, this report shows obvious differences between the shroud image and reproduction images using some sort of bas-relief method:

They show 3D characteristics similar to that of the Turin Shroud, but a luminance levels analysis show some typical differences that are evidenced in this work.

There is a graphic showing 3D elaboration of the luminance levels on page 5 of that document...

Another claim of 3-D information being reproduced is Nathan Wilson's 'shadow shroud.'
There are a number of problems with Wilson's claim, aside from not resulting in all 13 of the required traits...here is one that is easy to understand:

From shroud2000.com:

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, Thermo Chimica Acta (January 2005), thermo chemist Dr. Ray Rogers demonstrated the sample dated in 1988 was actually from a repaired area of the shroud and not representative of the entire cloth. The entire basis of Wilson’s theory is that it was a medieval forgery. But now the Shroud, based on the decay of vanillin in the linen, is at a minimum 1,300 years old, well beyond the time when a glass plate could have been manufactured to accommodate Wilson's theory.
(I linked to this full report further down in this reply)

What has been proven?
The carbon dating is inaccurate because we do not know the subject, for all we know the church could have given us samples from a completely different artifact from the era.
Until there is transparent scientific research done then we can not be sure.
Even then it would prove very little.

I do not think the scientists have any reason to question the validity of the specimen, itself, as being the so-called Shroud of Turin...in addition, STURP had 120 hours of direct access to the shroud in October of 1978...

...also, here is a peer-reviewed report on this matter...very transparent and scientific.

At shroud2000.com, the report is described as:

Published Jan 20, 2005 in ThermoChimica Acta, a peer reviewed scientific journal, Dr. Ray Rogers, retired Fellow with the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory and lead chemist with the original Shroud science team (STURP), has proven conclusively that the sample cut from The Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from an area of the cloth that was re-woven during the middle ages. The re-weave probably occurred in 1534 following the near catastrophic fire of 1532.

Here is a summation of that report, found at the bottom of the report:

The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis/ms proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth. The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud. Because the storage conditions through the centuries are unknown, a more accurate age determination will require new radiocarbon analyses with several fully characterized and carefully prepared samples.



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by queenannie38
 


I used to look like Jesus, but Lady Liberty broke my throat and cut my hair.

there are plenty of Heavy Metal Hippies left out there though
edit on 8-4-2012 by SisyphusRide because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by IgnorantSpecies
Secondly, carbon dating is not the best thing with a subject like the Shroud because it has been suggested that there may be different parts to the shroud that have been added at different times.

Thirdly, even if it is from the era we are claiming that this is the shroud that Jesus wore which is crazy. We do not even know if Jesus existed and there were millions of people in that era it becomes statistically impossible for it to belong to the one person we claim.


There is an overwhelming scientific consensus that an exact re-creation of the shroud is not technologically possible. There's no paint or pigments to indicate that it is a painting. It's like the shroud took a picture of the person's face.

You can't ignore the evidence. The shroud bears forensic evidence that is consistent with a man being crucified. At least 10,000 people were crucified by the Roman empire from the 6th century B.C to the 4th century A.D. We're going from your estimate of millions (not sure where you got that from) to a much smaller number. There are secular and biblical accounts of a Jewish rabbi and healer named Yahushua ben Yosef that was crucified by the Roman empire in the 1st century A.D. So we have a man committing miracles that was crucified and reportedly wrapped in the shroud of Turin when he died. Essentially the shroud itself meets the criteria of a miracle. Yahushua ben Yosef's face is ostensibly the most likely candidate for the image on the shroud.
edit on 8-4-2012 by CaptainNemo because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomtangentsrme

What belief of mine have I put on you besides saying I trust you are not lying? To quote myself: "Not being you, I cannot have a say one way or another about the beliefs you hold to be true."

But as you are so insistent on saying I am "putting your belief on me," I will give you something I believe: There is no truth only perception.
I am glad that you "KNOW." For those of us that do not, could you present some evidence of anything you have claimed on this thread?


Thank you in advance.



that part is Your Belief you are placing on me. IE. You cannot know that you cannot know... I won't use that against you, neither one of us can prove the point either way.

Knowing is not something I can transfer. I don't believe things. I just don't have room for it. I can not tell you True truth. talking is a human things and humans don't have truth. I was always an Athiest Scientist before Knowing. I am still a Scientist, but I also Know.

As soon as I put something into words It is not truth. The Bible isn't the Word of God, it is the Word Translated into human understanding. You are not supposed to say things that others are not ready to hear.

I have gone past the I that has a name, and into the Observer that watches the I that has a name. I became Everything. I Know.

I AM.

Thanks for staying civil, I can be pushy. And about the 13 and 33 thing I am not trying to prove anything. I'm not trying to argue, even though I am argueing... I don't care about Masons, I just look at written words and I can see untruths. I don't know the truths of those words or the significance of those numbers. I just see those numbers a lot, and they have something to do with turning into light.


I read the post above mine. You have to realize I have no care about the shroud really. I saw Jesus. That is Exactly what he looks like. Even if it was made in 1200-1400 or whatever, Whoever made it, if it's "fake" knew what Jesus looks like.



carbon dating is not the best thing with a subject like the Shroud because it has been suggested that there may be different parts to the shroud that have been added at different times.
so date it a few times at the center bottom, center middle(not sure there is a spot to do as such), center top.. The Oldest date you get should be the correct one.


Thirdly, even if it is from the era we are claiming that this is the shroud that Jesus wore which is crazy. We do not even know if Jesus existed and there were millions of people in that era it becomes statistically impossible for it to belong to the one person we claim.


It is possible... Your logic is silly... Silly to think we cannot figure out history I mean. I am not saying it's possible to prove it without any doubt, but you can never do that with anything...I think you meant statistically you cannot prove it, not it's statistically impossible...
edit on 4/8/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
It's fake. Yeshua would have never left anything behind to be used as an idol or that could be worshipped, nor would the apostles have allowed that.

It's even been proven a fake. The R.C.C. likes showing off fake relics which from a common sense viewpoint should tell you that in itself is fake.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
It's fake. Yeshua would have never left anything behind to be used as an idol or that could be worshipped, nor would the apostles have allowed that.

It's even been proven a fake. The R.C.C. likes showing off fake relics which from a common sense viewpoint should tell you that in itself is fake.


How can you even say that based on all the insurmountable evidence presented.? The image was left after the person was dead, so the messiah had no conscientious control over it. The object is nor never was presented to be worshiped. By that logic, Yahushua should have meticulously planned to have all significant items pertaining to his existence destroyed. Including the holy grail. Why would he want to destroy evidence of his own existence?

The apostle(s) were in possession of the artifact after his death, using the artifact in Passover ceremonies in the Eastern Orthodox Church, founded by the St. Paul and the apostles. Then it makes it's first documented appearance through a French crusader in a Byzantine church. The relic was subsequently captured by the French and the Shroud of Turin is then a known possession of a French nobler.


It's not an "idol". Christianity doesn't have idols. Don't deny good history bro. Maybe this will help people believe.



posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Correct me if im wrong...

this shrouds imprint was supposedly made by his spirit passing though the shroud?

How does that work if he was wrapped in it... when he was already "dead"?




posted on Apr, 9 2012 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Correct me if im wrong...

this shrouds imprint was supposedly made by his spirit passing though the shroud?

How does that work if he was wrapped in it... when he was already "dead"?



I have no doubts of it's authenticity. Though I am having trouble understanding what exactly the image of the shroud is in technical terms. An extremely intense and quick burst of light, fraction of a second, projected upward an image onto a thin top layer of the linen. This was a burial cloth, so a source of radiation must have come from the body. The only thing with that type of energy in a man is his immaterial soul.

The scriptures say Yahushua was dead for three days before being resurrected. It doesn't tell us where his spirit went for those three days. If we assume it left the body, like it traditionally does for average joes like us, the spirit must have reanimated him on the third day. So, was the flash of light the result of his spirit entering his body in that moment or did his heart beat, lungs breath and eyes open then "FLASH". Pure light energy forever leaves it's mark on Earth for all the skeptics and apologists to try and fail to re-create. If this isn't proof of the messiah's supernatural origin, I don't know what is.

Akragon, you are not a Christian, correct? How do you feel about the shroud? Do you believe Yahushua was the son of God?





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join