Shroud of Turin: "Authentic" [Archive]

manufan10

12-22-2011, 12:45 PM

"A series of experiments conducted by Italian researchers indicate the Shroud of Turin is likely authentic, but the team has not yet reached a definite conclusion."

http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/jesus-christ-shroud.png

http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/shroud.png

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/shroud-of-turin-jesus-burial-cloth-authentic_n_1161363.html?ref=religion&icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D121982#es _share_ended

"The most important question, the "question of questions" remains the same: how did that body image appear on the Shroud?"

http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/homepage/inquiries-and-interviews/detail/articolo/sacra-sindone-holy-shroud-sabana-santa-10738/

redzero

12-22-2011, 12:51 PM

Wasn't this shown to be fake years ago?

manufan10

12-22-2011, 12:53 PM

Wasn't this shown to be fake years ago?

Yes, but it hasn't stopped people from doing further research. I find it fascinating and intriguing even if it is proven to be faked. Even with today's technology, they have yet to be able to duplicate it, which I find interesting.

Drachen

12-22-2011, 01:11 PM

I tight they has proven that it was real, but not anywhere near Jesus'time. In fact I thought most were positing that it was the burial shroud of Jacques De Mole

DarkReign

12-22-2011, 03:46 PM

...conducted by Italian researchers

Where is Turin, you ask? Why, its in Italy, of course.

Who had/has possession of such a shroud for many centuries? Why the Vatican, of course.

Who stands to benefit the most from authenticating its supposed origins? You answer that.

z0sa

12-22-2011, 03:54 PM

Authentically medieval. The carbon dating closed the case on that long ago.

How the face is 'transcribed' like so I find much more interesting. Cannot be replicated even in the lab? Odd.

manufan10

12-22-2011, 04:28 PM

Authentically medieval. The carbon dating closed the case on that long ago.

How the face is 'transcribed' like so I find much more interesting. Cannot be replicated even in the lab? Odd.

I've read articles and watched documentaries that "debunk" the carbon dating. Some of them could be plausible, but the Vatican would not allow the necessary tests to be done because they would have to cut a piece of the shroud nearer to the body.

Wild Cobra

12-22-2011, 04:29 PM

How the face is 'transcribed' like so I find much more interesting. Cannot be replicated even in the lab? Odd.
No one has conceived of how yet. I'll bet there is a simple way that no one thought of yet.

Wild Cobra

12-22-2011, 04:31 PM

Authentically medieval. The carbon dating closed the case on that long ago.

Maybe it was King Athur's...

Jesus

12-22-2011, 04:50 PM

Who'd a thought dirty laundry would cause such a fuss.

mouse

12-22-2011, 10:15 PM

Wasn't this shown to be fake years ago?

That never stopped you.

DMC

12-22-2011, 10:30 PM

lol religious nutjobs trying "research" using confirmation bias. "We know the Ark exists, the Bible says so, now we have to find it... oh look a toothpick on a mountain, we've found it!"

mouse

12-22-2011, 10:32 PM

lol religious nutjobs

People have a choice on they're beliefs just as you do, tossing outdated insults to them only makes you look bad. But that is something your an expert at already.

DMC

12-22-2011, 10:50 PM

People can believe whatever they're compelled to believe, but the "proof" aspect remains firmly in the realm of science and falsifiable claims.

DMC

12-22-2011, 10:55 PM

http://titano.sede.enea.it/Stampa/img/TecnologieLaser/Sindone1.jpg
Holy shit (lol) that's a diffusion pump. lol low rent. Plus it's not even running, no output cooling water line.

lol photo op in front of the "high tech" gadget.

mouse

12-22-2011, 11:00 PM

People can believe whatever they're compelled to believe,

Only if they want to be insulted.

but the "proof" aspect remains firmly in the realm of science and falsifiable claims.

Has Science proved Man Evolved from the Ape?

Both sides have an unbelievable answer.

would you agree?

cantthinkofanything

12-22-2011, 11:09 PM

mouse

12-23-2011, 12:20 AM

Why not ask the Experts?

http://www.mailbling.com/heat26.jpg

scott

12-23-2011, 12:46 AM

It's definitely possibly authentic... maybe.

DMC

12-23-2011, 01:46 AM

Apes... :lmao

DMC

12-23-2011, 01:50 AM

No one has conceived of how yet. I'll bet there is a simple way that no one thought of yet.
http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/J/c/virgin_mary_grilled_cheese.jpg

The Holy cheese sandwich..

Let's see you recreate this. Must be from Jesus.

Halberto

12-23-2011, 03:56 AM

I like people that distrust science like mouse. Makes it easier to find a job that pays well.

Wild Cobra

12-23-2011, 05:41 AM

http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/J/c/virgin_mary_grilled_cheese.jpg

The Holy cheese sandwich..

Let's see you recreate this. Must be from Jesus.
Next, some kid in school, will get in trouble because his pizza slice looks like a gun.

DMC

12-23-2011, 10:39 AM

I like people that distrust science like mouse. Makes it easier to find a job that pays well.
I ignore it. Those arguments were debunked a long time ago, no need to rehash it. It's just a troll.

rascal

12-23-2011, 10:42 AM

It is real.

rascal

12-23-2011, 10:47 AM

That is the face and image of Christ.
It was a miracle that cannot be replicated.
It was a gift to the believers. The non believers would still not believe if Christ came down from the skies.

Sportcamper

12-23-2011, 10:48 AM

Very nice group photo...:toast

lefty

12-23-2011, 10:49 AM

It's a weather balloon

DMC

12-23-2011, 10:54 AM

That is the face and image of Christ.
It was a miracle that cannot be replicated.
It was a gift to the believers. The non believers would still not believe if Christ came down from the skies.
The babelcloth

As if anyone knows what Jesus of Nazareth looked like.

Any face with a beard and long hair must be Jesus, no one else could dress like that.

Jesus was a trend setter

He set trends

rascal

12-23-2011, 10:59 AM

DMC

12-23-2011, 11:15 AM

Show me a pic for comparison.

I believe what I am compelled to believe.

Compel me.

manufan10

12-23-2011, 11:22 AM

The babelcloth

As if anyone knows what Jesus of Nazareth looked like.

Any face with a beard and long hair must be Jesus, no one else could dress like that.

Jesus was a trend setter

He set trends

Technically, believers in the shroud believe that it's actually the blood marks on the forehead, hands, feet, and side of the figure on the shroud that make them believe that it's Jesus, and not the facial features. The bloodied spots line up with the biblical accounts. The crown of thorns, the nails in the hands and feet, and the pierced side appear to line up accurately.

rascal

12-23-2011, 12:00 PM

Show me a pic for comparison.

I believe what I am compelled to believe.

Compel me.

You have no faith.
People with no faith will not believe.

JoeChalupa

12-23-2011, 12:02 PM

Faith. It is like the Virgin de Guadalupe that was imaged on Juan Diego's tunic.

JoeChalupa

12-23-2011, 12:04 PM

Very nice group photo...:toast

:tu That's me and the wife in there.

DMC

12-23-2011, 01:13 PM

You have no faith.
People with no faith will not believe.
Why do you need evidence if you have faith?

Religious people :lmao

JoeChalupa

12-23-2011, 01:21 PM

Why do you need evidence if you have faith?

Religious people :lmao

:tu I concur. That is why all the doubters don't bother my faith at all.

DMC

12-23-2011, 01:36 PM

:tu I concur. That is why all the doubters don't bother my faith at all.
My point is that people take things like "miracles" and this shroud facade and they call it evidence, then they say you have to have faith.

Faith is in lieu of evidence.

Some people lack the ability to suppress the mind's natural tendency to call bullshit.

JoeChalupa

12-23-2011, 01:43 PM

My point is that people take things like "miracles" and this shroud facade and they call it evidence, then they say you have to have faith.

Faith is in lieu of evidence.

Some people lack the ability to suppress the mind's natural tendency to call bullshit.

It takes faith to believe with out "evidence". Some ask for "proof" that God exists while I see proof all around us everyday. But I hear ya.

Wild Cobra

12-23-2011, 02:38 PM

Editing... starting new thread...

Rather than sidetracking, here is a new thread for the pizza gun (http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188371)

rascal

12-23-2011, 06:44 PM

How many Mannys in the Photo?

Spursfan092120

12-23-2011, 10:28 PM

My point is that people take things like "miracles" and this shroud facade and they call it evidence, then they say you have to have faith.

Faith is in lieu of evidence.

Some people lack the ability to suppress the mind's natural tendency to call bullshit.

Why is it that in this thread, nobody has cared if you believe or not, and have not asked for you to believe, yet you continue to look down on them for believing and try to get them to not believe? What do you gain from them thinking you're right?

DMC

12-23-2011, 11:33 PM

Why is it that in this thread, nobody has cared if you believe or not, and have not asked for you to believe, yet you continue to look down on them for believing and try to get them to not believe? What do you gain from them thinking you're right?

1. Everyone here wants the person they are talking to to think they are right, including you.

2. I haven't asked anyone to not believe.

3. I've only stated points just as they have.

4. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

6. An image of a face on a cloth isn't evidence of a Christ.

7. It's debatable if it's even caused by a real face, so that one has to be overcome first.

8. Are you afraid someone will begin to use deductive reasoning skills?

scott

12-24-2011, 12:36 AM

1. Everyone here wants the person they are talking to to think they are right, including you.

2. I haven't asked anyone to not believe.

3. I've only stated points just as they have.

4. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

6. An image of a face on a cloth isn't evidence of a Christ.

7. It's debatable if it's even caused by a real face, so that one has to be overcome first.

8. Are you afraid someone will begin to use deductive reasoning skills?

You must have faith to understand Point #5.

Spursfan092120

12-24-2011, 12:41 AM

Blake

12-24-2011, 01:12 AM

You must have faith to understand Point #5.

Merry #5mas

Jesus

12-24-2011, 02:53 AM

6. An image of a face on a cloth isn't evidence of a Christ.

Prove it.

DMC

12-24-2011, 11:49 AM

Prove it.

I just did.

DMC

12-24-2011, 11:50 AM

3, 4, 6, 7, and 8 prove my point

Via fiat?

BacktoBasics

12-25-2011, 07:04 PM

Technically, believers in the shroud believe that it's actually the blood marks on the forehead, hands, feet, and side of the figure on the shroud that make them believe that it's Jesus, and not the facial features. The bloodied spots line up with the biblical accounts. The crown of thorns, the nails in the hands and feet, and the pierced side appear to line up accurately.This is typical of bible thumping weekend warriors who really don't that much about their religion but were taught in Sunday school to avoid arguing with those who don't believe and resort to faith.

Its obvious the shroud has a likeness to the perception of Jesus. The blood stains or markings equate to pure conjecture as there is no provenance for accurate reference.

BacktoBasics

12-25-2011, 07:14 PM

That is the face and image of Christ.
It was a miracle that cannot be replicated.
It was a gift to the believers. The non believers would still not believe if Christ came down from the skies.It most likely can't be replicated because its almost impossible to authentically age that type of fabricate in a short period of time. The markings are unique not just to the shroud but also unique by exposure and location.

You don't seem to understand what constitutes proof or better yet empirical data. The inability to replicate hundreds of years of degradation in no way proves its origin to be of Christ or not of.

Go ahead and post the source you're referencing that proves its a gift of Christ, its origin and its his likeness.

Jesus

12-26-2011, 06:51 AM

I just did.

No, you did not.

DMC

12-26-2011, 11:22 AM

No, you did not.
I did. You have to have faith you son of a god.

SnakeBoy

12-26-2011, 12:07 PM

rascal

12-26-2011, 01:04 PM

Go ahead and post the source you're referencing that proves its a gift of Christ, its origin and its his likeness.

If you don't want to believe and need proof that is your problem, not mine.

Doubting Thomas is a good story for you.

BacktoBasics

12-26-2011, 05:34 PM

If you don't want to believe and need proof that is your problem, not mine.

Doubting Thomas is a good story for you.It most certainly is your problem when you claim it be something that has yet to be proven. You condescendingly addressed a few members in this thread as if the "nonbelievers" were beneath you or somehow not "in the know". If you're going the claim something to be fact or authentic then back it up.

Don't address the issue as a matter of fact address the issue as "I believe" or "we believe" or "its my opinion". If you address the issue as an absolute matter of fact then the burden of proof falls on you because you're the one making the claim. If you're incapable of rationalizing something of historical significance then don't engage in these conversations just take your "faith" or your "belief" and take them away because a conversation or better yet a debate is no place for a lack of rationalization and contemplation.

Emily Post's The Guide to Good Manners for Kids is a good book for you.

Drachen

12-27-2011, 09:19 AM

I don't know if it's real or not but my wife and I did go see the shroud last year and it was quite an experience. I'd recommend it to anyone, believers or not.

Even more recommended would be to take the tour of the excavations beneath St. Peters Basilica. Incredible experience.

This would be something that I would love to do. Probably moreso than seeing a burial cloth from the middle ages (though its possible ties to the Templar knights would be pretty interesting to me).

DoubtingThomas

12-27-2011, 03:04 PM

If you don't want to believe and need proof that is your problem, not mine.

Doubting Thomas is a good story for you.

:tu

mouse

12-28-2011, 11:53 AM

It most certainly is your problem when you claim it be something that has yet to be proven.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/06/article-0-02EC002200000578-483_468x326.jpg

DMC

12-28-2011, 03:58 PM

It most certainly is your problem when you claim it be something that has yet to be proven. You condescendingly addressed a few members in this thread as if the "nonbelievers" were beneath you or somehow not "in the know". If you're going the claim something to be fact or authentic then back it up.

Don't address the issue as a matter of fact address the issue as "I believe" or "we believe" or "its my opinion". If you address the issue as an absolute matter of fact then the burden of proof falls on you because you're the one making the claim. If you're incapable of rationalizing something of historical significance then don't engage in these conversations just take your "faith" or your "belief" and take them away because a conversation or better yet a debate is no place for a lack of rationalization and contemplation.

Emily Post's The Guide to Good Manners for Kids is a good book for you.
This gets into epistemology and from there likely deteriorates into solipsisms.

It happens every time. That's why I don't go too far into it with blind faithers.

DMC

12-28-2011, 03:59 PM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/06/article-0-02EC002200000578-483_468x326.jpg
The evolution of Chuck Norris.

rascal

12-29-2011, 10:47 AM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/06/article-0-02EC002200000578-483_468x326.jpg

Why does the one on the left still exist?
They should have been evolved and long extict by now.

mouse

12-29-2011, 09:13 PM

This topic is another example of how flawed carbon dating really is.

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-turin-shroud.htm

You can take three bone samples off a toe of a dinosaur in a museum and send all three to three different carbon dating testing labs and receive three different dates. Ranging 4 thousand years to 4 million years all the way down to 400 years. Send them again to Three others sites gets Three different times again. It's only real Science on when Scientist want to call it Science or not... it depends on if they like the results they get after testing.

Example
A:

After testing if Scientist "like" the results?

Scientist are pleased and they now proved the Bible wrong, This is not the fabric that was used on Jesus This is further proof Carbon Dating is a respected "Science" and it proves that the Shroud of Turin is fake.

Example
B:

After testing if Scientist "dislike" the results?

Scientist are not pleased Carbon Dating proved the dirt sample on the bottom of the Grand canyon are no more than a few years old and are not "2 Million" years old like we claimed in the text books from the Dirt samples taken above the Grand Canyon .
So therefore.... Carbon dating is not really the final word .... after all, Isn't Science constantly "Refore vising" itself?

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-turin-shroud.htm

BacktoBasics

12-29-2011, 09:24 PM

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/10/06/article-0-02EC002200000578-483_468x326.jpgNice deflection.

BacktoBasics

12-29-2011, 09:27 PM

This topic is another example of how flawed carbon dating really is.

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-turin-shroud.htm

You can take three bone samples off a toe of a dinosaur in a museum and send all three to three different carbon dating testing labs and receive three different dates. Ranging 4 thousand years to 4 million years all the way down to 400 years. Send them again to Three others sites gets Three different times again. It's only real Science on when Scientist want to call it Science or not... it depends on if they like the results they get after testing.

Example
A:
If they want to prove the Bible wrong Carbon Dating is a respected Science and it proves that is not the fabric that Jesus used.

Example
B:
Carbon Dating proves the dirt sample on the bottom of the Grand canyon are no more than a few years from the Dirt samples above the Grand canyon and not "2 Million" years old like they claim, then Carbon dating is a science and and after all Isn't Science constantly "Revising" itself?

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-turin-shroud.htmInstead of trivializing the debunkers how about contributing precisely what authenticates the shroud as that of Christ? I don't recall any of that data being tossed around.

mouse

12-29-2011, 09:47 PM

Nice deflection.

Facts are facts, if they deflect lies and unproven theories?
that really is not under my control.

mouse

12-29-2011, 09:52 PM

Instead of trivializing the debunkers how about contributing precisely what authenticates the shroud as that of Christ? I don't recall any of that data being tossed around.

In 1988 radiocarbon dating test was performed on small samples of the shroud. The laboratories at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology,

What part of "tossed around" do you not get?

DMC

12-29-2011, 10:29 PM

Some of you toss around the word "theory" like it means "hunch".

mouse

12-29-2011, 10:41 PM

Some of you toss around the word "theory" like it means "hunch".

:lmao

BacktoBasics

12-30-2011, 03:18 PM

Facts are facts, if they deflect lies and unproven theories?
that really is not under my control.The only thing deflected is you from the original debate. Which was my point. Bringing up the flaws in evolution doesn't bring or take away credibility from those who claim the shroud to be authentic. You deflected from the topic in order to attack a completely separate issue.

Why not discuss the shroud instead of attempting to bring other theories to the table.

Just so we're clear what are your thoughts on the Shroud? Obviously we're not debating whether or not its authentic. Its clearly a Shroud.

So the question is.

Is it the Shroud of Christ or not?

redzero

12-30-2011, 03:23 PM

:lol mouse is the king of non-sequiturs and straw men. Trying to have a serious conversation with him is futile, and he will eventually run away.

DMC

12-30-2011, 04:04 PM

:lol mouse is the king of non-sequiturs and straw men. Trying to have a serious conversation with him is futile, and he will eventually run away.

Blatant, damn near patented fallacious arguments are the first sign I look for before running the opposite way.