The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
30-05-2013, 09:42 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
The rational explanation is that it's a fourteenth century icon. The irrational explanation - besides being irrational - just has too many problems. First thing comes to mind is how the proportions are not right for a human but curiously identical to fourteenth century portraiture... Consider

And PleaseJesus, doesn't he just wanna take an ice-cream scoop to the inside of your cranium? I know I feel that way when I read his posts. Thumbsup

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2013, 01:57 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
This is a new one on me. What do you mean not right for a human but right for portraiture? It must be taken into account that:

*The shroud figure evidences wearing coins on His eyes which were imaged onto the shroud

*The shroud figure evidences a broken nose

*Byzantine art particularly shows a Christ figure that looks like the shroud figure, inductively we can see the shroud is of early origin (hint hint).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
30-05-2013, 02:38 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-05-2013 01:57 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This is a new one on me. What do you mean not right for a human but right for portraiture? It must be taken into account that:

*The shroud figure evidences wearing coins on His eyes which were imaged onto the shroud

No... It doesn't.

Quote:*The shroud figure evidences a broken nose

Again... it doesn't. Are we looking at the same artifact?

Quote:*Byzantine art particularly shows a Christ figure that looks like the shroud figure, inductively we can see the shroud is of early origin (hint hint).

Um. Not really? I mean, are you serious? What art? Show me. It's irrelevant though, because the most your "evidence" would show is that it was a work of art based on early Byzantine depictions likely made hundreds of years after the last person to see Jesus died.



Are you high on Christ or something? If so, tell me your secret, because I never found bible pages to make good rolling papers. That ink is usually carcinogenic.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Phaedrus's post
30-05-2013, 11:47 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
There are a couple of other shrouds that were supposed to be associated with Jesus and I can't remember their names but here is some compelling information on te Turin one.

This is from the McCrone Research Institute which was named for him after his death.

According to Dr. Walter McCrone and his colleagues, the 3+ by 14+ foot cloth depicting Christ’s crucified body is an inspired painting produced by a Medieval artist just before its first appearance in recorded history in 1356.

The faint sepia image is made up of billions of submicron pigment particles (red ochre and vermilion) in a collagen tempera medium. The pigments red ochre and vermilion with the collagen tempera medium was a common paint composition during the 14th century; before which, no one had ever heard of the Shroud.

Initial Examination – 1979

Dr. McCrone determined this by polarized light microscopy in 1979. This included careful inspection of thousands of linen fibers from 32 different areas (Shroud and sample points), characterization of the only colored image-forming particles by color, refractive indices, polarized light microscopy, size, shape, and microchemical tests for iron, mercury, and body fluids. The red ochre is present on 20 of both body- and blood-image tapes; the vermilion only on 11 blood-image tapes. Both pigments are absent on the 12 non-image tape fibers. The paint pigments were dispersed in a collagen tempera (produced in medieval times, perhaps, from parchment). It is chemically distinctly different in composition from blood but readily detected and identified microscopically by microchemical staining reactions. Forensic tests for blood were uniformly negative on fibers from the blood-image tapes. Based on these findings, McCrone postulated that the Shroud was painted in 1355.

Further Research in 1980

In 1980, using electron microscopy and x-ray diffraction, McCrone found red ochre (iron oxide, hematite) and vermilion (mercuric sulfide); the electron microprobe analyzer found iron, mercury, and sulfur on a dozen of the blood-image area samples. The results fully confirmed Dr. McCrone’s results and further proved the image was painted twice – once with red ochre, followed by vermilion to enhance the blood-image areas.

In 1987, carbon dating at three prestigious laboratories agreed well with his date: 1355 by microscopy and 1325 by C-14 dating. The suggestion that the 1532 Chambery fire changed the date of the cloth is ludicrous. Samples for C-dating are routinely and completely burned to CO 2 as part of a well-tested purification procedure. The suggestions that modern biological contaminants were sufficient to modernize the date are also ridiculous. A weight of 20th century carbon equaling nearly two times the weight of the Shroud carbon itself would be required to change a 1st century date to the 14th century (see ‘Amount of Modern Biological Contaminant Required to Raise the Date of a 36 A.D. Shroud’). Besides this, the linen cloth samples were very carefully cleaned before analysis at each of the C-dating laboratories.

Experimental details on the tests carried out by McCrone are available in five papers published in three different peer-reviewed journal articles: The Microscope 28, p. 105, 115 (1980); The Microscope 29, p. 19 (1981); Wiener Berichte uber Naturwissenschaft in der Kunst 1987/1988, 4/5, 50 and Acc. Chem. Res. 1990, 23, 77-83.

Conclusion:

The “Shroud” is a beautiful painting created about 1355 for a new church in need of a pilgrim-attracting relic.

Shakespeare Insult 13 – Henry IV Part 1
“That trunk of humours, that bolting-hutch of beastliness, that swollen parcel of dropsies, that huge bombard of sack, that stuffed cloak-bag of guts, that reverend vice, that grey Iniquity, that father ruffian, that vanity in years?”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
30-05-2013, 11:48 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(30-05-2013 01:57 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This is a new one on me. What do you mean not right for a human but right for portraiture? It must be taken into account that:

*The shroud figure evidences wearing coins on His eyes which were imaged onto the shroud

*The shroud figure evidences a broken nose

*Byzantine art particularly shows a Christ figure that looks like the shroud figure, inductively we can see the shroud is of early origin (hint hint).

Does it even matter if it's fake?

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2013, 07:29 AM (This post was last modified: 31-05-2013 10:58 AM by DeavonReye.)
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Post #74 for the win.

To repeat: The “Shroud” is a beautiful painting created about 1355 for a new church in need of a pilgrim-attracting relic.

"Pilgrimage" was big business in that time. What better way to con the gullible in than to have the "actual burial linens of the messiah" or "the bone of Peter", etc...? It is still fooling people today.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DeavonReye's post
31-05-2013, 10:13 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Also, PleaseJesus, in looking at the figure there is an absence of the image having wrapped around the human face which would have distorted the features. It is flat like a painting. The hair is hanging down like someone standing up. The hair should fall to the sides and be matted with blood. It isn't. Aged blood turns black with time it doesn't remain reddish. The image is elongated per the style of the 12th and 13 century. (I was an Art Major and studied this stuff)

And then there is this quote from a report by Pierre D'arcis written to Pope Clement VII in 1389.....



"The case, Holy Father. stands thus. Some time since in this diocese of Troyes the dean of a certain collegiate church, to wit, that of Lirey, falsely and deceitfully, being consumed with the passion of avarice, and not from any motive of devotion but only of gain, procured for his church a certain cloth cunningly painted, upon which by a clever sleight of hand was depicted the twofold image of one man, that is to say, the back and the front, he falsely declaring and pretending that this was the actual shroud in which our Saviour Jesus Christ was enfolded in the tomb, and upon which the whole likeness of the Saviour had remained thus impressed together with the wounds which He bore. . . And further to attract the multitude so that money might cunningly be wrung from them, pretended miracles were worked, certain men being hired to represent themselves as healed at the moment of the exhibition of the shroud."

There are other shrouds that have been purported to be Jesus' funeral wrappings with images on them. Relics were a big business in the Middle Ages and are even around today. Slivers of wood from the "true cross" are still out there. The few that have been tested revealed their "true" history.....from trees far too young to have been around in the time of Jesus.

Stuff like this happens a lot.

Shakespeare Insult 13 – Henry IV Part 1
“That trunk of humours, that bolting-hutch of beastliness, that swollen parcel of dropsies, that huge bombard of sack, that stuffed cloak-bag of guts, that reverend vice, that grey Iniquity, that father ruffian, that vanity in years?”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
31-05-2013, 11:00 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
Thanks to all for your thoughtful and sincere comments. Everyone here is paying close attention and I appreciate it.

The image on the shroud wasn't pained on, because when examined under a microscope it is "on" or "off" in perfect binary symmetry... the weave of the fiber looks like this:

-
-
--- ---
-
-

And on in a checkerboard pattern with entire, full spaces on the checkerboard either colored or discolored. Yes, it is in cruciform shapes.

Also, one must regard the pre-archaeological "forgeries" of the shroud. What I mean by that is the shroud is "painted" as if it wrapped someone full body front and back with the bend in the sheet around the head. Added to that are the coins on the eyes, the Jerusalem thorn pollen samples on the shroud, etc. and our 14th century forger had both gotten cloth from Jerusalem with thorn pollen on it and invented archaeology to study ancient Jewish burial practice centuries before modern archaeology...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2013, 11:14 AM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(31-05-2013 11:00 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Thanks to all for your thoughtful and sincere comments. Everyone here is paying close attention and I appreciate it.

The image on the shroud wasn't pained on, because when examined under a microscope it is "on" or "off" in perfect binary symmetry... the weave of the fiber looks like this:

-
-
--- ---
-
-

And on in a checkerboard pattern with entire, full spaces on the checkerboard either colored or discolored. Yes, it is in cruciform shapes.

Also, one must regard the pre-archaeological "forgeries" of the shroud. What I mean by that is the shroud is "painted" as if it wrapped someone full body front and back with the bend in the sheet around the head. Added to that are the coins on the eyes, the Jerusalem thorn pollen samples on the shroud, etc. and our 14th century forger had both gotten cloth from Jerusalem with thorn pollen on it and invented archaeology to study ancient Jewish burial practice centuries before modern archaeology...

Why are you so invested in an object that is clearly a fake from an age when fake artifacts were the norm? Every single piece of information about the shroud screams fake and yet here you are trying to spin fantasy after fantasy to try and make the square peg fit the round hole. Let it go man, this piece being a fake doesn't disprove all of christianity it just proves that the middle ages pilgrimage routes had a lot of "True Relics" that were neither.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
31-05-2013, 01:46 PM
RE: The shroud of Turin isn't a forgery!
(31-05-2013 11:00 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Thanks to all for your thoughtful and sincere comments. Everyone here is paying close attention and I appreciate it.



Also, one must regard the pre-archaeological "forgeries" of the shroud. What I mean by that is the shroud is "painted" as if it wrapped someone full body front and back with the bend in the sheet around the head. Added to that are the coins on the eyes, the Jerusalem thorn pollen samples on the shroud, etc. and our 14th century forger had both gotten cloth from Jerusalem with thorn pollen on it and invented archaeology to study ancient Jewish burial practice centuries before modern archaeology...


Having spent a good part of my life as an artist who paints on fabric, PleaseJesus, I can tell you that this is painted on fabric. The twill weave you see is a weave found later in textiles. The type of weave used in ancient times isn't as complex. Yes, they did have a twill weave but it was a simpler type of weave during Jesus' time. (Yes, I also weave fabric. It's a hobby of mine.) The looms didn't exist for this type of weave in the year 33.

One of the "experts" who is trying to authenticate the pollen and place it in Jerusalem also authenticated the "Hitler Diaries" and if you don't know what that is look it up. It was one of the biggest hoaxes of the 20th century.

Recently there was a shroud discovered in a tomb in Jerusalem from the same time as Jesus and, what do you know, the weave is a simpler weave. The cloth around the head was wrapped in the traditional Jewish burial style of circling the head. It was the last area to be wrapped so loved ones could say good by.

The only people who are trying to keep this shroud intact as a "true" are the people who stand to make the most money off of it.

Simply put, this is tempera paint on fabric.

Shakespeare Insult 13 – Henry IV Part 1
“That trunk of humours, that bolting-hutch of beastliness, that swollen parcel of dropsies, that huge bombard of sack, that stuffed cloak-bag of guts, that reverend vice, that grey Iniquity, that father ruffian, that vanity in years?”
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: