Did an earthquake create the Turin Shroud ?

[+DieChecker]

I've seen many shows on the shroud and one of the most interesting things was that the image appears to be holographic in nature, that is, it is a three dimensional image, not a 2D image one gets when painting or staining. If I remember correctly they had to use computer technology to bring out the 3D quality of the image. If this is correct, then how and why would someone make, or even know how to make this type of image centuries ago. As to carbon dating of the shroud, the object itself has been through a fire, which I would guess would alter the carbon content from the smoke and it has had some cloth added to patch holes and as a boarder, and I believe the sample was taken from the boarder which was added at a later time. A better analysis would require taking material from near the image, not on added material. One investigator on the show said he believed the image was burned into the cloth by light, light of a similar quality to a LASER. In any case it's an interesting piece of history.

Those are a lot of good points. It has also been water stained which, if I remember right, can also affect the C14 test a little.

From what I remember the Catholic Church has refused any more C14 samples from the Shroud at this time.

[pallidin]

I'm not a big fan of the "Shroud" though I am a Christian.

I think that "science" has gone a little too far here, given that this type of event does not appear to be existant in other findings at that time, according to the article.

Edited February 13, 2014 by pallidin

[Rlyeh]

I agree that this seems far fetched to me also. I also agree that another C14 test should be done.

From one documentary that showed how the piece used for the C14 sample that got 1300 AD was from a repaired section. They even got the pieces left over from 1978 and took a small piece apart to show that the fibers were of different ages. It seemed very logical and would seem to indicate that the C14 date was contaminated by more modern material.

A convenient excuse that doesn't hold up under investigation.

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n65part5.pdf

https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/view/3419

[toast]

Wash+tumble it!

[Davros of Skaro]

You know that the Corinthians were actually Greeks, right? And that the book 1st Corinthians was probably written like 30 years after Jesus died, right. You can't take a religous document written for Greeks and apply it backward to prove 1st century BC Judeans did not have long hair. The Christians were considered a Cult by the Romans and the Jews at this point, so it seems to me unless you can find something in Deuderanomy, or one of the other books about short hair, that Jesus could easily have had long hair.

Jews were all over, because they were merchant traders.Philo lived in Alexandria, and he made the pilgrimage to Judea for Passover at least once.There were Jews in Rome too.

"Under the Romans, Corinth was rebuilt as a major city in Southern Greece or Achaia. It had a large mixed population of Romans, Greeks, and Jews."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Corinth

Leviticus 19

27 “‘Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

What is "at the sides of your head" mean, and did Jesus clip off edges of his beard in defiance of his father?

[Sundew]

Jesus as per scripture was a Nazerene, and not a Nazirite like Samson.

You never answered my question on wether you think "The Flinstones" are a loosely based historical documentation.

The town of Nazareth has nothing what-so-ever to do with a Nazirite vow, it is merely a place name like New York or London.

The Flintstones were directly based on the old black and white TV show "The Honeymooners" staring Jackie Gleason.

[Davros of Skaro]

The town of Nazareth has nothing what-so-ever to do with a Nazirite vow, it is merely a place name like New York or London.

The Flintstones were directly based on the old black and white TV show "The Honeymooners" staring Jackie Gleason.

Well scripture never mentions Jesus taking a vow, and no mention of a shroud with his full body image.There have been supposed cloths with Jesus's face on it.Not untill the middle ages does this Shroud get mentioned, and is mentioned as a forgery.

John 20:6-7

6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,

7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

Yes.

The Honeymooners is a classic with many imitators since then in one form, or another.

[Leonardo]

I'd want to know what research backs that up. Did they actually try to replicate the result using neutron irradiation? Use a modern piece of cloth, irradiate it, then see if there's an image and see what date the C14 test shows. It shouldn't be hard to come up with some tests that replicate the hypothetical process.

Doug

It's not even been shown that earthquakes produce neutron radiation - that in itself is only a hypothesis.

So, the hypothesis that the Shroud is a result of such 'earthquake-induced neutron radiation' is even further removed from being a sound observation.

[Decemberwriter70]

It's not real. Can we move on now?

[+DieChecker]

Jews were all over, because they were merchant traders.Philo lived in Alexandria, and he made the pilgrimage to Judea for Passover at least once.There were Jews in Rome too.

"Under the Romans, Corinth was rebuilt as a major city in Southern Greece or Achaia. It had a large mixed population of Romans, Greeks, and Jews."

http://en.wikipedia....Ancient_Corinth

Leviticus 19

27 “‘Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard.

What is "at the sides of your head" mean, and did Jesus clip off edges of his beard in defiance of his father?

I suppose some of the Corinthians could have been Jews.

Doesn't the Leviticus quote actually square up with long hair?

[+DieChecker]

A convenient excuse that doesn't hold up under investigation.

http://www.shroud.co...fs/n65part5.pdf

https://journals.uai...ticle/view/3419

The one links goes on about how the corners are dirty and that is how they appeared to be a different color, rather then due to a repair.

How clean does a sample have to be to get an accurate C-14 test? Would the "greasy dirt" have been hard to get off, and would they have seriously chemically treated the bit of cloth to get the dirt off before doing the C-14 test? Wouldn't even using some kind of soap have affected the test somewhat?

Basically what I read was not that there was no repairs done, but that it is the articles opinon that there should never have been a need for such a repair.

Edited February 24, 2014 by DieChecker

[Rlyeh]

The one links goes on about how the corners are dirty and that is how they appeared to be a different color, rather then due to a repair.

How clean does a sample have to be to get an accurate C-14 test? Would the "greasy dirt" have been hard to get off, and would they have seriously chemically treated the bit of cloth to get the dirt off before doing the C-14 test? Wouldn't even using some kind of soap have affected the test somewhat?

Basically what I read was not that there was no repairs done, but that it is the articles opinon that there should never have been a need for such a repair.

I thought it was pointing out rather than using the claim the piece was dirty to explain the discoloration, the repair excuse was used, even though there was no signs of repair to the part that was tested.

[+DieChecker]

I thought it was pointing out rather than using the claim the piece was dirty to explain the discoloration, the repair excuse was used, even though there was no signs of repair to the part that was tested.

It said in the one article that they didn't know why the excuse of a repair was even used, when the dirt and grease alone would ruin the C-14 test.

The presence of the greasy dirt deposit at the

"removal site" alone would be sufficient to demonstrate the uselessness of the carbon-14

method, without having to construct an untenable "mending theory".

http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n65part5.pdf (page 5)

Thus, I wonder what the C-14 testers did to the fragments they tested, if anything?

Is there a good way to get the dirt and grease off the fibers in order to get a correct C-14 test? I'm assuming there is, but I don't know what it might be, and so I am curious. And whether that procedure was used on the Shroud fibers or now would also be interesting to know.