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.
The Man of the Shroud “underwent an under glenoidal dislocation of the humerus on the right side and lowering of the shoulder, and has a flattened hand and enophthalmos; conditions that have not been described before, despite several studies on the subject. These injuries indicate that the Man suffered a violent blunt trauma to the neck, chest and shoulder from behind, causing neuromuscular damage and lesions of the entire brachial plexus.”
This is the conclusion four university professors arrived at in an in-depth study they carried out on the image of the crucified Man on the Turin Shroud. They observed that “the posture of the left claw-hand is indicative of an injury of the lower brachial plexus, as is the crossing of the hands on the pubis, not above the pubis as it would normally be, and are related to traction of the limbs as a result of the nailing to the patibulum.” Only part of the study has been published so far in Injury , the prestigious International Journal of the Care of the Injured. The rest of the study is to follow shortly. The four experts involved in the research are: Matteo Bevilacqua of the Hospital-University of Padua, Italy; Giulio Fanti of the Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Padua, Italy; Michele D’Arienzo of the Orthopaedic Clinic at the University of Palermo, Italy and Raffaele De Caro of the Institute of Anatomy at the University of Padua, Italy.
'Coins dated to the early 1st century are seen over the eyes of the shroud image'. This claim was originally made by Father Francis Filas after examining a 1931 photograph, yet the coins can't be seen in better quality 1978 photos. We are expected to believe that poor quality photos showed not just coins, but enough detail to determine when they were minted. Another problem with the coins is explaining why they were placed on the eyes. There was no such Jewish custom in 1st century Palestine. The claim of some believers to see coins must be weighed against the claim of others to also see nails, a spear, a sponge on a reed, a crown of thorns, a hammer, scourges, tongs, dice, flowers etc on the shroud. Even most shroud researchers reject these claims as simply an example of an overactive imagination, as do I.
'Pollen from Palestine is found on the shroud'. This claim has been discredited as "fraud" and "junk science". The person who originally claimed to have found the pollen on the Shroud was Max Frei, a Swiss criminologist. However the pollens were very suspicious, as pollen experts quickly pointed out. First of all, they were missing the most obvious pollen you would expect, which would be from olive trees. 32 of the 57 pollens allegedly found by Frei are from insect-pollinated plants and could not have been wind-blown onto the exposed shroud in Palestine. Similar samples taken by STURP in 1978 had comparatively few pollens. Also cloth was often brought to medieval Europe from Palestine, so there is no strong support even if pollen was found.
In their conclusion, Bevilacqua, Fanti, D'Arienzo and De Caro write that “from correspondences here and elsewhere detected between TS Man and the description of Jesus’s Passion in the Gospels and Christian Tradition, the authors provide further evidence in favour of the hypothesis that TS Man is Jesus of Nazareth.”
The image on the shroud has his hands neatly folded across his genitals. A real body lying limp could not have this posture. Your arms are not long enough to cross your hands over your pelvis while keeping your shoulders on the floor. To achieve this the body can not lie flat, yet Jewish burial tradition did not dictate that a body must be hunched up so as to cover the genitals before wrapping in the shroud. The most obvious answer is that the artist knew the image would be displayed and didn't want to offend his audience or have to guess what the genitals of Jesus would look like. A dead body wrapped from head to toe in an opaque cloth wouldn't be concerned with modesty since he wasn't actually naked. He was well covered.
The first discovery the four experts made, is that the Man of the Shroud underwent a dislocation of the shoulder and paralysis of the right arm.
originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: FlyersFan
What about the rumors regarding the 40 or so copies of the shroud that were passed around as very expensive memorabilia?
Heart failure is also brought on by the crucifixion process. Some years ago Dr. Hermann Modder of Cologne, Germany carried out some scientific tests to determine the cause of Christ's death. He discovered an interesting fact:
In the case of a person suspended by his two hands the blood sinks VERY QUICKLY into the lower half of the body. AFTER SIX TO TWELVE MINUTES blood pressure has dropped by 50% and the pulse rate has DOUBLED. Too little blood reaches the heart, and FAINTING ENSUES. This leads to a SPEEDY orthostatic collapse through insufficient blood circulating to the brain and the heart. Death by crucifixion is therefore [also] due to heart failure. ...
Literary sources giving insight into the history of crucifixion indicate that Roman crucifixion methods had the condemned person carry to the execution site only the crossbar. Wood was scarce and the vertical pole was kept stationary and used repeatedly. Below, in “New Analysis of the Crucified Man,” Hershel Shanks concludes that crucifixion in antiquity involved death by asphyxiation, not death by nail piercing.
originally posted by: AfterInfinity
a reply to: FlyersFan
What about the rumors regarding the 40 or so copies of the shroud that were passed around as very expensive memorabilia?
originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: solomons path
Sorry but that article does nothing to disprove the shroud. Sometimes the Romans impaled their victims too. Does that mean crucifixion didn't happen? Or that in some cases the wrists weren't nailed to the crossbeam? There are various execution methods in practice today. To assume the romans only used one technique makes you guilty of the very thing you have accused supporters of the shroud of doing: Finding evidence to support the narrative, instead of letting the evidence describe the narrative.
I do agree with you however, that there is no body and hence no way to really make a determination about specific injuries. Seems like a lot of conjecture.
originally posted by: solomons path
originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: solomons path
Sorry but that article does nothing to disprove the shroud. Sometimes the Romans impaled their victims too. Does that mean crucifixion didn't happen? Or that in some cases the wrists weren't nailed to the crossbeam? There are various execution methods in practice today. To assume the romans only used one technique makes you guilty of the very thing you have accused supporters of the shroud of doing: Finding evidence to support the narrative, instead of letting the evidence describe the narrative.
I do agree with you however, that there is no body and hence no way to really make a determination about specific injuries. Seems like a lot of conjecture.
There are plenty of other facts that do a better job to disprove the shroud, and I didn't claim the article above was one of them. 1) I presented the article in response to the comment by another poster (St Udio) that the act of carrying the cross could account for the injuries this paper asserts the figure had. If the "cross" was just a "cross beam" then no, it could not. It was more historical information that goes against what the authors of the paper state. 2) I never claimed that the Romans didn't use other means or techniques, so I'm not sure what you are arguing against or accusing me of.
Regardless, there is no way for them to tell what type of internal or structural injuries were present or what casused them without remains. Even the negative image of the shroud gives no indication of these type of injuries. Heck, you can't even see, due to burning and repair, the one area they base the majority of their thesis on (right shoulder) and there is absolutely no detail in the area of the figure where the C4 and C5 vertebra are located.
originally posted by: solomons path
originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: solomons path
Sorry but that article does nothing to disprove the shroud. Sometimes the Romans impaled their victims too. Does that mean crucifixion didn't happen? Or that in some cases the wrists weren't nailed to the crossbeam? There are various execution methods in practice today. To assume the romans only used one technique makes you guilty of the very thing you have accused supporters of the shroud of doing: Finding evidence to support the narrative, instead of letting the evidence describe the narrative.
I do agree with you however, that there is no body and hence no way to really make a determination about specific injuries. Seems like a lot of conjecture.
There are plenty of other facts that do a better job to disprove the shroud, and I didn't claim the article above was one of them. 1) I presented the article in response to the comment by another poster (St Udio) that the act of carrying the cross could account for the injuries this paper asserts the figure had. If the "cross" was just a "cross beam" then no, it could not. It was more historical information that goes against what the authors of the paper state. 2) I never claimed that the Romans didn't use other means or techniques, so I'm not sure what you are arguing against or accusing me of.
Regardless, there is no way for them to tell what type of internal or structural injuries were present or what casused them without remains. Even the negative image of the shroud gives no indication of these type of injuries. Heck, you can't even see, due to burning and repair, the one area they base the majority of their thesis on (right shoulder) and there is absolutely no detail in the area of the figure where the C4 and C5 vertebra are located.
well one can figure it the f out, ya think?
you do the autopsy, oh wait!!!
no body!
we have a shroud., 3D too.
explain it