The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-03-2013, 02:24 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(28-03-2013 05:01 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Google some of the other things that the Catholics profess to be true...and if you look closely at the church you may find that they are not above lying. Ask an altar boy how far to trust the leaders of the Church.

A prejudicial fallacy of composition. Just because there are Catholics who lie doesn't mean that all Catholics lie, just as lying atheists don't discredit all of the rest of us.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 04:30 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
This bullshit will never go away.

It's not Christ's burial shroud-accept the damn facts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 12:23 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(28-03-2013 04:57 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(28-03-2013 04:42 PM)Wolf Bird Wrote:  Someone posted this on a facebook group about skepticism. New book claims that the shroud of Turin isn't a medieval forgery.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...rgery.html

Of course, the authors who did the study are Catholics. And I realize it's probably in the book, but what's the methodology of their studies, and the basis of the claim that tests in 1988 can't be trusted due to 'laboratory contamination'?


Yes it is.
Laboratory contamination of the same amount at 3 separate labs simultaneously?
Really?

I have a bridge to sell.

The contamination need not come from the labs themselves. It could have come from the fire the shroud was exposed too or from micro-organisms living on the shroud. If all three labs used the same cleaning technique prior to testing and that technique was flawed then it is certainly possible the test results are errant even though they are consistent.

KingsChosen is a lying douchebag
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 12:32 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-03-2013 12:23 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  The contamination need not come from the labs themselves. It could have come from the fire the shroud was exposed too or from micro-organisms living on the shroud. If all three labs used the same cleaning technique prior to testing and that technique was flawed then it is certainly possible the test results are errant even though they are consistent.

[Image: grasping-at-straws1.jpg]

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Vosur's post
30-03-2013, 12:50 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-03-2013 12:32 PM)Vosur Wrote:  [Image: grasping-at-straws1.jpg]

I think the shroud is a work of art made by a man so I'm not sure what your are talking about with your grasping at straws meme. You really should find someones position on something before being critical of it. I never claimed the shroud was real. I only claimed that there mechanisms by which three labs could produce errant yet consistent results.

KingsChosen is a lying douchebag
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-03-2013, 04:01 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(29-03-2013 02:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Other shroud evidences:

*pollen from Jerusalem Thorn bush found on shroud

*image is best revealed/shown to have been created at a angle perfectly perpendicular to shround draped over 3D figure, as if via beams of light/radiation

*shroud cloth is dark/light at a microscopic level on individual cross threads of cloth

Etc.

John 20:7~ "And the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen clothes but folded up in a place by itself."


Huh, that was easy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheLastEnemy's post
31-03-2013, 01:12 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-03-2013 12:50 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I think the shroud is a work of art made by a man so I'm not sure what your are talking about with your grasping at straws meme. You really should find someones position on something before being critical of it. I never claimed the shroud was real. I only claimed that there mechanisms by which three labs could produce errant yet consistent results.

You're arguing for reasonable doubt rather than probability. The labs are aware of "possible contaminants", and I would be wary of criticizing their process without being an expert myself. Furthermore, it has been proven beyond a doubt that the pattern on the shroud can be duplicated in a very short time, suggesting a natural explanation for what was originally deemed 'supernatural'.

We're critical of your position because it's expected: an attempt to defend the Christian faith in the Shroud of Turin. It's entirely possible that we could be unjustly attacking it simply because we attack most "articles of Christian faith", but this is a clear loser for you. If you check out the Wikipedia entry, you'll find more than 10 different lines of evidence that scientists found prove the Shroud's lack of authenticity (and all of them lend evidence to the now-assumed date of its origin). They're not all mistaken -- you are.

My girlfriend is mad at me. Perhaps I shouldn't have tried cooking a stick in her non-stick pan.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Starcrash's post
31-03-2013, 04:15 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(31-03-2013 01:12 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(30-03-2013 12:50 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I think the shroud is a work of art made by a man so I'm not sure what your are talking about with your grasping at straws meme. You really should find someones position on something before being critical of it. I never claimed the shroud was real. I only claimed that there mechanisms by which three labs could produce errant yet consistent results.

You're arguing for reasonable doubt rather than probability. The labs are aware of "possible contaminants", and I would be wary of criticizing their process without being an expert myself. Furthermore, it has been proven beyond a doubt that the pattern on the shroud can be duplicated in a very short time, suggesting a natural explanation for what was originally deemed 'supernatural'.

We're critical of your position because it's expected: an attempt to defend the Christian faith in the Shroud of Turin. It's entirely possible that we could be unjustly attacking it simply because we attack most "articles of Christian faith", but this is a clear loser for you. If you check out the Wikipedia entry, you'll find more than 10 different lines of evidence that scientists found prove the Shroud's lack of authenticity (and all of them lend evidence to the now-assumed date of its origin). They're not all mistaken -- you are.

What I am mistaken about? My belief that origin of the shroud is not supernatural or my belief that three labs could have consistent but errant results?

KingsChosen is a lying douchebag
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 07:00 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Quote:John 20:7~ "And the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen clothes but folded up in a place by itself."


Huh, that was easy.
There are two cloths. The full length (actually, double full length) Shroud of Turin, and another cloth, The Sudarium, in the Cathedral of San Salvador in Oviedo, Spain.

So your Bible quotation strengthens, not weakens, the case for Bible accuracy. Thank you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-04-2013, 08:20 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-03-2013 02:24 AM)Starcrash Wrote:  
(28-03-2013 05:01 PM)Anjele Wrote:  Google some of the other things that the Catholics profess to be true...and if you look closely at the church you may find that they are not above lying. Ask an altar boy how far to trust the leaders of the Church.

A prejudicial fallacy of composition. Just because there are Catholics who lie doesn't mean that all Catholics lie, just as lying atheists don't discredit all of the rest of us.

I did not say all Catholics lie.
The Catholic church had told some pretty big lies to keep their followers as well as to "protect" their followers.
No where did I say 'all' about anything.
But thanks for explaining the concept of a blanket statement, I must put that on the "What Did You Learn Today" thread.

'See here they are, the bruises, some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way.' -JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: