Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 3 Next »
From	Message
apatzer 22-Jun-24, 16:11	The Shroud of Turin. Disclaimer, it isn't important to me one way or another if the shroud of Turin is authentic or not. What is important to me is the truth. I have heard very scientific people state absolute suppositions about how the image got on the shroud and have started it as facts while simultaneously discounting scientific evidence that doesn't agree with their pre conceived notions and opinions. So what are the facts? The Shroud of Turin has been dated to different periods based on various scientific tests: 1988 Radiocarbon Dating: Samples from the Shroud were dated by laboratories in Arizona, Oxford, and Zurich to between 1260 and 1390 CE, suggesting a medieval origin. BTW 3 samples had three different results. www.shroud.com en.m.wikipedia.org 2013 Study by University of Padua: Using different methods, researchers suggested the Shroud dates back to between 300 BC and 400 AD, potentially placing it within the timeframe of Christ's life. www.usatoday.com 2022 X-ray Dating: A peer-reviewed study concluded that the Shroud is most likely around 2,000 years old. This is " peer reviewed data "... www.mdpi.com And adherents to the original dating also have a hard time explaining this... The Pray Codex, is an ancient Hungarian manuscript dated to 1192-1195, contains an illustration that some researchers believe depicts the Shroud of Turin. Key points about this connection include: The manuscript predates the earliest radiocarbon dating of the Shroud (1260-1390 CE) by about 70 years. The illustration shows Jesus laid out for burial with some similarities to the Shroud image: Jesus is depicted naked with arms crossed over the pelvis No thumbs are visible on the hands There's a blood stain on Jesus' forehead L-shaped burn holes are shown on the fabric The fabric in the illustration may be depicting a herringbone weave pattern similar to the Shroud. Some scholars argue these details suggest the artist was familiar with the Shroud image. www.raydowning.com That is just the Data concerning the date... Then we have the Image... The image is in the negative. When was photography invented? Well all joking aside... The image on the Shroud of Turin remains a mystery with no definitive scientific explanation. Several hypotheses have been proposed: Radiation Hypothesis: Some researchers suggest that an intense burst of vacuum ultraviolet radiation, far exceeding any known natural source, could have created the image. This radiation would have discolored the uppermost surface of the fibrils without scorching them, producing a perfect three-dimensional negative image of the body. Solar Reflex Hypothesis: Another theory posits that the image was formed by solar rays reflected by the anointed body and chemically registered on the cloth's topmost fibers, possibly with a solution of aloes and myrrh acting as a catalyst. Despite these theories, the exact mechanism remains unexplained, and some aspects are considered by many to belong to the realm of miracles. www.magiscenter.com opg.optica.org www.simplycatholic.com The facts are despite decades of scientific scrutiny no definitive answers can be provided on how the image was transferred to the shroud. That's not me telling you that, that is the multitude of scientists that have actually studied it. But some people would rather listen to crack pots who do experiments and make conclusions that would never stand up to scientific scrutiny. In conclusion, those who want the shroud to be fake, will use any flimsy excuse to not look at the scientific data in an objective unbiased way. Many who want or need it to be real, so the same. But what does the Data tell us? There are cases where flaked artifacts go undetected by science for a period of time. However they are always proven to be either fake or authentic. The shroud seems to be different as it can't be proven one way or the other. Well not yet anyway... So what about provenance? The provenance of the Shroud of Turin is uncertain before the 14th century. Historical records indicate that a shroud bearing the image of a crucified man appeared in the village of Lirey, France, between 1353 and 1357, owned by French knight Geoffroi de Charny. In 1453, Margaret de Charny deeded the Shroud to the House of Savoy. It was damaged by fire in 1532 and moved to Turin in 1578, where it has been kept since. There are claims of earlier references to Jesus's burial shroud, but no definitive evidence links these to the Shroud of Turin. en.m.wikipedia.org However we have a clear illustration of the shroud in the Hungarian prayer codex/manuscript. How is that explained?
victoriasas 22-Jun-24, 17:43	Thanks very much for this thread and all the information in it. Looking forward to going through the links. I honestly don’t know what to make of the Shroud - it’d be much easier for me to make up my mind if scientists could explain how the image got on the Shroud. That they can’t - potentially nearly 2,000 years later - tells me the image may have been due to the Resurrection. Not (obviously) saying that definitively as I’m not anywhere near knowledgeable enough about it and haven’t spent much time at all looking into it. But if it is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, the fact it’s not proven is how I think God would want it and do it. Faith is of primary importance to Him, and, if something is proven, faith is not necessary. But looking forward to learning more about it. Thanks again for this thread and your research. I don’t want to duplicate any of your research so it may be a while before I post in here. I’d be curious what percentage of Christians believe the Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. As far as I know, the Catholic church has not taken a position on it one way or the other.
apatzer 22-Jun-24, 18:24	Vic I absolutely agree with your statements. I also thought about, if faith is proven and came to the same conclusion as you. To me, that makes it even more likely. There isn't any other artifact ( (that I know of) that science can't prove if it is a fake or not. Sometimes artifacts evade detection for a time. It is very interesting to me.
thumper 22-Jun-24, 18:46	The technical inspection investigation side of me wants to know how the image was placed on the shroud. That answers the question, everything else is just noise... IMO
apatzer 22-Jun-24, 18:49	Sudarium of Oviedo The face covering of Jesus's crucifixion is called the Sudarium of Oviedo. This cloth is believed to have covered Jesus's head after his death, absorbing blood and other fluids. Scientific studies have shown that the bloodstains on the Sudarium match those on the Shroud of Turin, suggesting both cloths covered the same person. The Sudarium contains blood type AB, the same as the Shroud of Turin, and both show similar patterns of wounds and blood flows, reinforcing their connection to Jesus of Nazareth. illuminadomine.com www.simplycatholic.com catholicleader.com.au Is there forensic evidence liking the Sudarium of Oviedo directly to the shroud of Turin (having covered the same person? Yes, there is forensic evidence linking the Sudarium of Oviedo directly to the Shroud of Turin, suggesting they covered the same person. Both cloths have been found to contain blood of type AB, which is rare and more common in the Middle East. The bloodstains on both cloths match in location and pattern, indicating they were used on the same body. Additionally, pollen analysis has traced both cloths' paths from Jerusalem to Europe, further supporting their connection. dash.harvard.edu www.reviewofreligions.org Has there been a forensic blood pattern analysis linking the shroud of Turin to the Sudarium of Oviedo? there has been forensic analysis comparing the bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo, with some studies suggesting a link between the two cloths: 1. Research conducted by the Spanish Center for Sindonology found significant correlations between the bloodstains on both cloths, including their number, distribution, and types. The study identified more than 20 points of comparison, exceeding typical criteria used in judicial systems for identifying individuals. www.traveler.com 2. Specific alignments were found in bloodstains and wounds on both cloths, particularly in areas like the forehead, back of the nose, right cheekbone, and chin. 3. Studies have shown that the bloodstains on both cloths are of the same blood type (AB) and appear to match in terms of placement, suggesting they could have covered the same head. 4. Forensic studies have been conducted to compare the patterns of the bloodstains and the possible wounds that would have caused them, suggesting both cloths might have been used on the same person. what is the provenance for the Sudarium of Oviedo? The Sudarium of Oviedo has a documented history dating back to the 6th century: It was first mentioned in 570 AD by Antoninus of Piacenza, who wrote that the Sudarium was being cared for near Jerusalem in a cave near the monastery of Saint Mark. In 614 AD, it was taken from Palestine to Alexandria by a presbyter named Philip to avoid destruction during the Sassanid Persian invasion. The cloth then traveled through northern Africa as the Persians conquered Alexandria in 616 AD. It arrived in Spain shortly after, entering at Cartagena with refugees fleeing the Persian invasion. Bishop Fulgentius of Ecija welcomed the refugees and relics, giving the chest containing the Sudarium to Leandro, bishop of Seville. In 657 AD, it was moved to Toledo. In 718 AD, it was taken to northern Spain to escape the advancing Moors. The Sudarium was hidden in a cave called Montesacro in the mountains of Asturias. In 840 AD, King Alfonso II built a chapel in Oviedo to house the Sudarium. On March 14, 1075, King Alfonso VI, his sister, and El Cid officially opened the chest containing the Sudarium. The Sudarium has been kept in the Cathedral of San Salvador in Oviedo since then, where it is displayed to the public three times a year. Has the Sudarium of Oviedo? been carbon dated? 1. Carbon dating tests estimated the Sudarium to be from the 7th century, specifically around 700 AD. 2. This carbon dating result conflicts with the documented history of the Sudarium, which traces it back to at least the 6th century. 3. The carbon dating of the Sudarium presents a discrepancy when compared to the Shroud of Turin. While the Sudarium was dated to around 700 AD, the Shroud was dated to 1260-1390 AD. 4. In 2016, a study concluded that the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo covered the same person, despite their different carbon dating results. 5. Some scientists have questioned the accuracy of the carbon dating results for both the Sudarium and the Shroud. Factors such as contamination from soil or oil could potentially affect the dating process. 6. The laboratory that conducted the carbon dating of the Sudarium also tested control samples. While three control cloths were dated as expected, a cloth from an Egyptian mummy was incorrectly dated to the 19th or 20th century, raising questions about the reliability of the dating method in this case. www.historicmysteries.com shroudstory.com www.hopechannel.com killingatheism.com Given these points, while the Sudarium has been carbon dated to around 700 AD, the accuracy of this date is debated due to conflicting historical evidence and its relationship with the Shroud of Turin. Again we have more questions than answers.
apatzer 22-Jun-24, 18:50	Thumper I largely agree with that conclusion.
victoriasas 22-Jun-24, 19:15	<<The technical inspection investigation side of me wants to know how the image was placed on the shroud. That answers the question, everything else is just noise... IMO>> I also agree with this. If the Shroud of Turin is not the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, why can’t scientists explain how the image got on the Shroud? Surely technology many centuries ago was not more advanced than it is today.
apatzer 23-Jun-24, 09:30	Vic The sad fact of reality is some people would rather believe that an unknown person in medieval times was several hundred years ahead of his time. Created one forgery that is so good it defies detection today. And if it was proven to be authentic those same rational science minded people who say. Well then it would have to be aliens.
thumper 23-Jun-24, 10:03	So your conclusion is that it's a 'forgery'? What does that mean? It's apparently a one off, one of a kind image so what is it a forgery of?
apatzer 23-Jun-24, 10:05	No, that isn't my conclusion at all. I was reiterating what some people have said.
apatzer 23-Jun-24, 10:07	They said that because of the high amount of forgerys or fakes that were presented as genuine. For profit, because they would sell them to the church. The Church would do their own investigations .
thumper 23-Jun-24, 10:14	Apatzer Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. Thanks for clarifying.
victoriasas 23-Jun-24, 12:14	@apatzer It’s pretty incredible what people will believe to deny the existence of God. Their insistence that everything must have and does have a natural cause leads them to some pretty bizarre conclusions.
apatzer 23-Jun-24, 12:57	Thumper Thank you for asking, no need to apologize at all. I appreciate you for asking me.
pawntificator 23-Jun-24, 19:27	I don't know anything about it, but I would love to see it. I'm not going to fly over the ocean for it though.
valley_forge 24-Jun-24, 10:30	Deleted by valley_forge on 24-Jun-24, 12:14.
thumper 24-Jun-24, 10:38	VF My mild curiosity about the shroud is technical not spiritual.
victoriasas 24-Jun-24, 10:43	Same here. I don’t need the Shroud of Turin to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ to keep or strengthen my faith. I do think it’s interesting, mostly because scientists today can’t explain how the image got on the Shroud.
apatzer 24-Jun-24, 10:47	VF Thank you for your opinion. This artifact (which I also have a purely scientific interest in) is either real or it's not. The fact that it is still a mystery is interesting. There are many many things that Christianity are not served by yet are vehemently promoted.
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 10:48	Yes, that mean "an unknown" in my words Get it ?
victoriasas 24-Jun-24, 10:54	Lack of “Irrefutable proof” does not mean something is “unknown.” You can (and I suspect will) argue your indefensible position for hours, and that’s Ok by me. But you’ll have to do it with someone else 👋
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 10:56	More mind reading ? I think I'll write a book "The mind reading magic of victoriasis"
valley_forge 24-Jun-24, 11:37	Deleted by valley_forge on 24-Jun-24, 12:14.
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 12:05	The weight of evidence for its validity, or not, appears to shift all the time If you are happy with the current position then fine   It does appear that the original carbon dating was badly flawed, so that argument is now moot A more modern one which is able to compensate for contaminants, such as the bacteria will be interesting
victoriasas 24-Jun-24, 12:13	@VF 11:37 No one on here is relying on religious relics to confirm God’s Word. That’s a strawman of your own construction. I and others find it interesting that scientists can’t explain how the image got on the Shroud of Turin. You’re arguing against a position no one on here has expressed.
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 12:23	But they can explain that, its not that hard to do via eliminating other very unlikely ideas, such as it being faked for example But that is not the issue is it ? Even their current favourite idea leaves many questions open which they cannot ( yet) answer Some form of radiiaton from the body itself, or outside of it Why or how that happened they do not know
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 12:32	Deleted by bridlad on 24-Jun-24, 12:33.
bridlad 24-Jun-24, 12:34	You might find this interesting Bob Rucker does a very good job of critisizing the Scientific approach so fer. In particular their presuppositions One cannot do a proper analysis if one presupposes that certain events cannot happen Well ,only if you know everything about everything ,and they do not www.youtube.com
victoriasas 19-Aug-24, 22:24	Published Aug. 19, 2024… <<Scientists make startling discovery after analyzing cloth 'Jesus was buried in' A controversial linen shroud - regarded by some to be the one Jesus was buried in - has baffled the world for more than centuries. When it was first exhibited in the 1350s, the Shroud of Turin was touted as the actual burial shroud used to wrap the mutilated body of Christ after his crucifixion. Also known as the Holy Shroud, it bears a faint image of the front and back of a bearded man, which many believers is Jesus' body miraculously imprinted onto the fabric. But research in the 1980s appeared to debunk the idea it was real after dating it to the Middle Ages, hundreds of years after Christ's death. Now, Italian researchers who used a new technique involving x-rays to date the material have confirmed it was manufactured around the time of Jesus about 2,000 years ago. They say the fact the timelines add up lends credence to the idea that the faint, bloodstained pattern of a man with his arms folded in front were left behind by Jesus' dead body. The Bible states that Joseph of Arimathea wrapped the body of Jesus in a linen shroud and placed it inside the tomb. Matthew 27:59-60 reads: 'Then Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a new linen cloth. He put Jesus’ body in a new tomb that he had dug in a wall of rock. Then he closed the tomb by rolling a very large stone to cover the entrance. After he did this, he went away.' The burial cloth has captivated the imagination of historians, church chiefs, skeptics and Catholics since it was first presented to the public in the 1350s. French knight Geoffroi de Charny gave it to the dean of the church in Lirey, France, proclaiming it as the Holy Shroud. It has been preserved since 1578 in the royal chapel of the cathedral of San Giovanni Battista in Turin, Italy. The cloth appears to show faint, brownish images on the front and back, depicting a gaunt man with sunken eyes who was about 5ft 7 to 6ft tall. Markings on the body also correspond with crucifixion wounds of Jesus mentioned in the Bible, including thorn marks on the head, lacerations on the back and bruises on the shoulders. Historians have suggested that the cross he carried on his shoulders weighed around 300 pounds, which would have left contusions. The Bible states Jesus was whipped by the Romans, aligning with the lacerations on the back, who also placed crown of thorns on his head before the crucifixion. In 1988, a team of international researchers analyzed a small piece of the shroud using carbon dating and determined the cloth seemed to have been manufactured sometime between 1260 and 1390 AD. This technique used the decay of a radioactive isotope of carbon (14C) to measure the time and date objects containing carbon-bearing material. Some experts have said that the linen's authenticity should no longer be disputed, claiming it was made from flax grown in the Middle East and features a helmet-style crown of thorns on the man's face. However, others have held on to the notion that it is fake due to the 1988 radiocarbon dating analysis conducted at three different laboratories, which all determined it was only seven centuries old. For the new study, scientists at Italy's Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council conducted a recent study using wide-angle X-ray scattering (WAXS). The technique measures the natural aging of flax cellulose and converts it to time since manufacture. The team studied eight small samples of fabric from the Shroud of Turin, putting them under an X-ray to uncover tiny details of the linen's structure and cellulose patterns. Cellulose is made up of long chains of sugar molecules linked together that break over time, showing how long a garment or cloth has been around. To date the shroud, the team used specific aging parameters, including temperature and humidity, which cause significant breakdown of cellulose. Based on the amount of breakdown, the team determined that the shroud of Turin was likely kept at temperatures at about 72.5 degrees Fahrenheit and a relative humidity of around 55 percent for about 13 centuries before it arrived in Europe. If it had been kept in different conditions, the aging would be different. Researchers then compared the cellulose breakdown in the shroud to other linens found in Israel that date back to the first century. 'The data profiles were fully compatible with analogous measurements obtained on a linen sample whose dating, according to historical records, is 55-74 AD, found at Masada, Israel [Herod's famous fortress built on a limestone bedrock overlooking the Dead Sea],' reads the study published in the journal Heritage. The team also compared the shroud with samples from linens manufactured between 1260 and 1390 AD, finding none were a match. 'To make the present result compatible with that of the 1988 radiocarbon test, the Shroud of Turn should have been conserved during its hypothetical seven centuries of life at a secular room temperature very close to the maximum values registered on the earth,' the study reads. Lead author Dr Liberato De Caro said in a statement that the 1988 test should be deemed as incorrect because 'Fabric samples are usually subject to all kinds of contamination, which cannot be completely removed from the dated specimen.' 'If the cleaning procedure of the sample is not thoroughly performed, carbon-14 dating is not reliable,' he added. 'This may have been the case in 1988, as confirmed by experimental evidence showing that when moving from the periphery towards the center of the sheet, along the longest side, there is a significant increase in carbon-14.' Scientists have long been studying the Shroud of Turin with hopes of solving the centuries-old mystery. More than 170 peer-reviewed academic papers have been published about the mysterious linen since the 1980s, with many concluded it to be genuine. Testing in the 1970s looked at whether the images were made through painting, scorching or other agents, but none could be confirmed. Another group of experts from the Institute of Crystallography announced in 2017 that they had found evidence that the shroud featured the blood of a torture victim. They claimed to have identified substances like creatinine and ferritin that are usually found in patients who suffer forceful traumas. The alleged findings contradicted claims the face of Jesus was painted on by forgers in medieval times.>> www.dailymail.co.uk
apatzer 20-Aug-24, 06:50	Thanks for post this Vic. IMHO, if the shroud was a forgery science would have easily proven it a long time ago ... And proven it " conclusively ". Although some people will still say the carbon dating of 1988 did prove it conclusively. To which I would say.... No ... No it was not conclusive. Not by a long shot. There is other evidence independent of the new dating results (that are more accurate than the carbon dating) it is an illustrated picture in a Hungarian manuscript from the 1100's . Which predates both carbon dating results obtained in 1988. The Hungarian Pray Manuscript, also known as the Pray Codex, contains an illustration dated to around 1192-1195 that some researchers believe depicts the Shroud of Turin. This illustration shows similarities with the Shroud, such as a naked Jesus with arms on the pelvis, no visible thumbs, a herringbone weave pattern, and an L-shaped pattern of burn holes. www.academia.edu en.m.wikipedia.org
Pages:  1 2 3 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, monthly chess tournaments, Internet chess league, chess teams, chess clubs, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.