Shroud of Turin: Thinking About Authenticity in 2010

The two paragraphs below, pertaining to the Shroud of Turin, were delivered as part of a debate speech by David J. Helfand, chair of the Department of Astronomy at Columbia University and co-director of the Columbia Astrophysics Laboratory during a speech at Columbia. The number of errors of fact, both historical and scientific is extraordinary for such an esteemed scientist.

How many mistakes can you find?

The Shroud of Turin project began in the late 1970s when a group of scientists and engineers, a large fraction of whom came from the Los Alamos Nuclear Weapons Laboratory (which I find a frightening thought), lugged millions of pounds of equipment over to Turin and were granted unlimited access to the shroud in order to perform scientific experiments on it to prove that it was the burial shroud of Christ. And indeed, the first experiments, all released through press releases and not scientific journals, were very encouraging. There was iron in the blood on the places where the nails had gone through the hands. The image on the cloth was not possible to produce prior to the age of photography and on and on.

Finally, ten years later, when the church relented and allowed two square centimeters of the cloth to be shipped off to two independent laboratories for double-blind tests of the age dating of the shroud, the age in both cases came back at about 650 plus or minus 20 years, or roughly, 1351 when historians had already shown that the Avignon Pope had excommunicated a French bishop for displaying a fraudulent burial cloth of Christ, "very cleverly painted." My question is, suppose the Carbon-14 data on the shroud had come back differently. Suppose it had come back with a date of A. D. 26. Would then Prof. McGrath or anyone else have said, "Oh, but science has nothing to do with religion, so we won't take that data into account?"

Stay tuned. A copy of History Channel’s “The Real Face of Jesus?” DVD to the winner. Answer by comments or email to [email protected]. I’ll get back to you in the same way, if you win, to get a shipping address from you privately.

14:26 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Funny Quote on Shroud of Turin Research Project

Hat tip to Joe Marino of the Shroud Science Group for this quote from an article by Cullen Murphy in Harpers, November 1981:

Theories abound as to how the shroud could have been concocted, and STURP is forever testing new ones, if only to keep the project fun. Should some member be seduced by the notion that the image was formed by an elusive combination of butter, lemon, and egg yolk, the team would immediately go into action, devising experiments, creating simulacra, baking the coated samples, irradiating them with lasers, burning them with acids, working feverishly until an excited phone call informed coordinators Jackson and Jumper that, while the mixture didn't yield an acceptable shroud image, it made a remarkably fine Hollandaise sauce."

The Harpers article is very informative and entertaining. You can find it in libraries. You can also find it online at http://www.harpers.org/archive/1981/11/0024680 but you will need to subscribe to the magazine to read it. The cost is $16.95 per year.

06:34 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Downloads of Face to Face with the Shroud of Turin

You can now download the phenomenal Shroud of Turin film from Performance Films made for the BBC. It is the first to be given access to the Shroud for close examination.

Reporter, Rageh Omaar, brings the story up-to-date by involving Oxford’s Radio Carbon Unit in a new investigation. Rageh comes face to face with the image on the Shroud and with those who have dedicated themselves to solving its mystery. First shown 2008.

Just £9.99 ipod/pad compatible.

Downloads

15:09 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Trial of the Shroud of Turin at Newman University in Wichita

If you are anywhere near Wichita. See announcement.

The Campus Ministry office at Newman University will present “Trial of the Shroud of Turin” at 7 p.m., Wednesday, Oct. 27, in the Dugan-Gorges Conference Center inside the Dugan Library on the campus of Newman University. The event is free and open to the public. The event will feature Larry Schauf presenting an examination of the evidence of whether the Shroud of Turin is the true burial cloth of Jesus or a medieval hoax.

Schauf, a board member of the Shroud of Turin Education and Research Association and a former federal prosecutor, will present the strongest evidence for both sides of the debate. At the conclusion of the presentation, the audience will serve as a jury and cast their votes based on what they have learned. A question and answer session will be held while the “ballots” are counted.

Newman University to present ‘Trial of the Shroud of Turin’ Oct. 27 « Newman University

15:08 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Holy Grail special on the National Geographic Channel

The broadcast is scheduled for September 27 at 9:00 pm Eastern Time. Do check NGC page for other time zones.

Follow NGC investigators to a mountaintop monastery in search of clues about the authenticity of a cup some believe to be the Holy Grail. On the trek, discover how and why the Third Reich relentlessly pursued the cup. And re-live the story of a priest said to have died suddenly after breaking the chalice, which miraculously repaired itself.

15:03 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Awful 2010 Exhibition Official Site

Well, this bills itself as the official website for the 2010 exhibit of the Shroud of Turin. The English version leave much to be desired. You would have thought they would have found someone who speaks English to do the translations. Did they use Google Translate? Most tabs in English simply say translation is coming soon or are in Italian. Online reservations are only in Italian. There is a big Multimedia section that takes forever to load and looks really cool, if you know Italian. Here are some:

BTW: They seem to have forgotten to mention the dates altogether.

Welcome Service tab:

The Shroud exhibition is an important pilgrimage opportunity but a chance to better know the Church of Torino, its territory, the province and Piedmont as well. The diocese of Torino, just like for all the former exhibitions (1998 and 2000) has arranged many services and initiatives to welcome groups from other Churches and christian communities as far as both the liturgy and the reciprocal acquaintance are concerned.

Moreover, the local turinese and piedmontese authorities have planned religious and cultural touristic initiatives linked to the exhibition.

For any information on tourist welcome, please check Turismo Torino.

The volunteers will be the first to welcome the visitors in the city and all along the exhibition route from the beginning to the end at the exit of the Cathedral. The volunteers for the Shroud and those of the City will also be present in other points along the route and in Torino.

Exposition day and hours tab:

During the exhibition the Mass will be celebrated in the Cathedral, in front of the Shroud, every morning at 7 and the Lodi prayer will be said at the end.

The Holy Sacrament will be exposed in the penitentiary at Palazzo Chiablese (at the end of the exhibition route map, penitentiary) all day long. The chapel will be reserved for silent prayer and eucharistical worship.

Some priests will be at disposal to hear confessions and administer the sacrament of Reconciliation in the penitentiary.

The route will be open from the end of the Mass up to 8 pm to attend the Shroud exhibition (reservations are required). It will be possibile to enter the Cathedral by the main door but then the Shroud will be only visible from a distance. The nave will be reserved to prayers and silent reflections.

In the evening, according to the calendar, the Cathedral may be open in case of particular ceremonies or religious cultural events.

Getting here tab:

Oops!

Churches and religious functions tab:

Attend the Shroud exhibition is an occasion to better know the Church of Torino visiting its temples and sanctuaries as well. During the exhibition many churches will welcome other pilgrimage moments, before and after the visit to the Shroud. Here you can find all information you may need about services and contacts.

Penitentiary tab:

The «penitentiary» is after the Shroud route, inside Palazzo Chiablese and immediately before Piazzetta Reale.

All day long, some priests will be at disposal to hear confessions and administer the sacrament of Reconciliation.

The chapel, where the Holy Sacrament is exposed everyday, is near the penitentiary and reserved for silent prayer and eucharistical worship.

Sacra Sindone - Welcome service

16:22 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Shroud of Turin has been duplicated

Technorati Tags: Shroud of Turin

14:15 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Freethinking Historian is not so Freethinking

Cross posted from Shroud of Turin Blog

Let’s correct Ethan the Freethinking Historian. We’ll do so in bold.

On Episode 30 of Radio Freethinker . . . we talked about the Shroud of Turin and some recent scientific tests that disproved its authenticity. (We’ll hold off on this because Ethan contradicts himself, further on down).

But before we go any further let’s discuss what the Shroud of Turin is. The shroud is a 14 x 3 foot piece of cloth with the image of a man who appears to have been killed by crucifixion. Supposedly, this is Jesus Christ and supposedly it’s stained with his blood, although the Catholic Church does not officially recognize it as authentic.
. . .

Since then the shroud has been subjected to carbon dating and now the recent scientific experiments by Luigi Garlaschelli. . . .

What Garlaschelli did was prove that with materials available in Medieval Europe, one could leave such an imprint on a piece of cloth. Not really, but read on.

Now this does not prove the shroud is a fake (emphasis mine, contradiction his, and I agree), it was already proved a fake when it was carbon dated several times in 1980’s. It was only dated once in 1988. One sample was divided between three labs. It has now been proved (if Ethan can use that word, so can I) that the sample was from a mended area of the cloth containing old and much newer thread. Moreover:

The combined evidence from chemical kinetics, analytical chemistry, cotton content, and pyrolysis/ms proves that the material from the radiocarbon area of the shroud is significantly different from that of the main cloth. The radiocarbon sample was thus not part of the original cloth and is invalid for determining the age of the shroud. – from Thermochimica Acta, an international science journal, “Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample from the Shroud of Turin” by Raymond Rogers, January 2005.

Rogers work has since been confirmed by numerous chemists, including John Brown at Georgia Tech and Bob Villarreal at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

The shroud was estimated to be no older than 1260, which would put it right in the period of time of pilgrimage and charlatans creating holy relics and then making a profit off them. Now, it is understood to be no later than 700 CE and perhaps earlier. Moreover, history reliably traces it back to 544 CE and there is some evidence that points back to at least the third century.

The only “controversy” was that scientist weren’t sure how the image was transferred to the cloth, which led some to proclaim that it could only be a real miracle. Actually, most scientist who have actually studied the image on fibers and thread from the shroud, under a microscope, believe that the image was formed by some natural process, possibly an amino/carbonyl reaction. Did some proclaim a miracle. Sure. That is to be expected. But the implication is misleading, not very freethinking.

However Garlaschelli proves that it was indeed possible, they placed a sheet over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. Then the cloth was artificially aged by heating it in an oven and washing it, this process removed the pigment from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. After that you just have add some burn marks or blood stains to get the final product.

Similar in appearance but not similar chemically, physically, optically. It proves nothing except that some arts and craft method can be used to make something that looks like the shroud.

If there is a lesson to be learned, don’t believe everything you read in the newspapers.

Ethan the Freethinking Historian's blog: Debunking the Shroud

16:06 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Viral Humor: Italian Scientist Reproduces Humans

Funny Stuff

Italian Scientist Reproduces Humans Using Materials Available in the Middle Ages Thus Proving that the First Humans Were Manmade

ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced a human being, a feat that he says proves definitively that humans, which Christians say are made in the image of God, are medieval fakes produced using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages.

A scientifically-made mannequin, measuring 6 feet, 2 inches tall, looks eerily like Luigi Garlaschelli, the scientist himself.

"We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as a human being," Luigi Garlaschelli, who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday.

A professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, Garlaschelli made available to Reuters the paper he will deliver and the accompanying comparative photographs.

The mannequin resembles the back and front of a bearded man with long hair with his arms crossed on his chest. He has two hands, two feet and a single head with two eyes and two ears.

Since Darwin, evolutionary biologists have believed that humans evolved along with other animals and plants from a common ancestor. But scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain why some people smoke cherry flavored pipe tobacco since it offers no evolutionary advantage.

Garlaschelli, who received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics, expects people to contest his findings. “They didn’t believe me when I reproduced the Shroud of Turin, Quantum physics and the Egyptian pyramids, thus proving that they, too, were medieval creations. “

“It works for me,” said PZ Myers, pastor of the Morris, Minnesota Pharyngula Church of Fundamentalist Atheists. “I was getting tired of evolution, anyway. I believe everything I read in the newspapers so long as it doesn’t conflict with my beliefs. If humans are manmade, that’s fine. I still don’t need to believe in God.”

Garlaschelli said the funding for his work by his own organization of like-minded atheists had no effect on his results. "I always start with results," he said. “That way, I always arrive at the desired conclusion.”

Shroud of Turin Blog

05:20 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Stephen Jones’ Take on the Garlaschelli Fake

Cross posted from Shroud of Turin Blog

Stephen Jones at The Shroud of Turin blog has offered us a compelling analysis of the dust up over the latest attempt to reproduce the Shroud of Turin and try to argue from that effort that the Shroud is a fake. This latest attempt is by Luigi Garlaschelli, a Researcher in Organic Chemistry, University of Pavia, Italy for a presentation to the Fifth World Skeptics Congress, 2004, Italy.

Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin

Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin, Reuters, Mon Oct 5, 2009 ... ROME (Reuters) - An Italian scientist says he has

[Above: The face of the Shroud (L) compared with Garlaschelli's shroud's image (R): Reuters]

reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ's burial cloth is a medieval fake. It is now over 20 years since a report in Nature, the world's most prestigious scientific journal, declared that radiocarbon dating provided "conclusive evidence" that the Shroud was "mediaeval":

"The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range .. for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 ... These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval." (Damon, 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, 337, p.614. My emphasis).

That there is still a need to "prove... definitively" that the Shroud is a medieval fake, is tacit acknowledgment by Shroud sceptics (i.e. true believers in the Shroud's inauthenticity) that none of their previous `proofs' of the Shroud being a fake hold water. And as we shall see, neither does this latest claim that the Shroud is a medieval fake hold water either.

The shroud, measuring 14 feet, 4 inches by 3 feet, 7 inches bears the image, eerily reversed like a photographic negative, of a crucified man some believers say is Christ. This is one of the tests that those who claim they have reproduced the Shroud must meet: it must be "reversed like a photographic negative." It is not enough to produce an image that is only superficially like the Shroud. It must be exactly like the Shroud in its uniquely important details - down to the microscopic level. I here predict that if this claimed reproduction of the Shroud is submitted for microscopic analysis, it will be shown to be unlike the Shroud, and therefore itself just a fake copy of the Shroud original.

But there is no need to even do that. There is a major difference between Garlaschelli's description of how he made his shroud's image (see below) and the image on the Shroud of Turin, that totally disqualifies Garlaschelli's shroud from being a faithful and credible reproduction of the Shroud of Turin.

"We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud," Luigi Garlaschelli,

[Left: Luigi Garlaschelli, Researcher in Organic Chemistry, University of Pavia, Italy: Fifth World Skeptics Congress, 2004, Italy]

who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday. Note that Garlaschelli only claims vaguely that his alleged reproduction "has the same characteristics as the Shroud." Why doesn't he say, "has the exact same characteristics as the Shroud"? Because he knows it doesn't!

A professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, Garlaschelli made available to Reuters the paper he will deliver and the accompanying comparative photographs. Superficially Garlaschelli's photographs look very convincing. It may even be that he has produced the best reproduction of the Shroud yet. If it is, and it fails to withstand microscopic analysis (as I predict it will-if it is ever submitted for such testing, which I predict it won't), that will be more evidence that the Shroud cannot be reproduced and therefore is the very burial sheet of Jesus, bearing the image of His crucified and resurrected body!

The Shroud of Turin shows the back and front of a bearded man with long hair, his arms crossed on his chest, while the entire cloth is marked by what appears to be rivulets of blood from wounds in the wrists, feet and side. The don't just appear to be blood, they are blood!:

"Adler was asked how he could answer McCrone's claim that there was no blood, but merely a mixture of red ocher and vermilion. Adler flashed on the screen the following table from our paper. Table 5 Tests confirming the presence of whole blood on the Shroud 1. High iron in blood areas by X-ray fluorescence 2. Indicative reflection spectra 3. Indicative microspectrophotometric transmission spectra 4. Chemical generation of characteristic porphyrin fluorescence 5. Positive hemochromogen tests 6. Positive cyanomethemoglobin tests 7. Positive detection of bile pigments 8. Positive demonstration of protein 9. Positive indication of albumin 10. Protease tests, leaving no residue 11. Positive immunological test for human albumin 12. Microscopic appearance as compared with appropriate controls 13. Forensic judgment of the appearance of the various wound and blood marks Then, after explaining each item briefly, Al said, `That means that the red stuff on the Shroud is emphatically, and without any reservation, nothing else but B-L-O-O-D!'" (Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," pp.215-216. Italics original).

Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. That dating has to be wrong. For one thing (and there are many) the

[Right (click to enlarge): The Hungarian Pray Manuscript and the Poker Holes: Daniel R. Porter]

Hungarian Pray manuscript (or codex) is dated 1192-95, or 65-68 years before 1260 the earliest possible radio- carbon date of the Shroud, yet it is obviously depicting the Shroud with its: 1. naked Jesus (otherwise unknown in the 12th century); 2. having his arms crossed in front; 3. hands with no thumbs; about

[Left: Burn holes on the Shroud of Turin depicted on the Pray codex of 1192-95: Daniel R. Porter]

to be covered by a shroud with 4. the same herringbone weave pattern; and 5. (the clincher) the same unique pattern of burn holes that are on the Shroud of Turin!

Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business. If the "sceptics" were truly sceptical (and not just true believers in the Shroud's inauthenticity) they would realise that it would take far less than the Shroud to make money in the gullible 14th century:

"Also is it not rather incredible that this unknown individual should have gone to so much trouble and effort to deceive in an age in which, as twentieth-century journalists have reminded us, a large proportion of the populace would have been very easily duped by a feather of the Archangel Gabriel or a phial of the last breath of St Joseph?" (Wilson, 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," pp.58-60).

But scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth. Yes! But given that:

"The Shroud of Turin is now the most intensively studied artifact in the history of the world. Somewhere between 100,000 and 150,000 scientific man-hours have been spent on it, with the best analytical tools available." (Heller, 1983, Ibid., p.219. My emphasis).

how can it be that "scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth"? How could an unknown medieval forger create only one work such that the advanced science of the 20-21st century has been "at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth"? That alone is proof (if one thinks about it) that no medieval (or any time) forger created the image on the Shroud.

Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages. That materials were available in the middle ages does not mean that someone then could have reproduced the Shroud. For starters it was not known the Shroud was a photographic negative until the end of the 19th century:

"The modern history of the Shroud might be said to have begun on May 8, 1898, when Secondo Pia was permitted to photograph the Shroud for the first time while it was being exhibited at the Cathedral in Turin. Pia was flabbergasted to find that his glass-plate photographic negative was turning out in the developing bath to show, in fact, a photographic positive image. The Shroud itself had somehow been stained in such a way that the body imprint on the cloth was a negative. This feature alone would seem to rule out the claim that the Shroud is an ancient or medieval forgery. What artist, centuries before, would have fabricated details that could only be discerned with the help of a nineteenth-century invention? And the photographic process, subsequently confirmed by the photographs taken by G. Enrie in 1931, brought out a wealth of hitherto concealed details." (Sullivan, B.M., 2005, "Reading the Shroud of Turin: How in fact was Jesus Christ laid in his tomb?," National Review, July 20, 1973, Reprinted March 24, 2005).

They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. Note the "rubbed it." That means the pigment and acid marks on Garlaschelli's shroud's image would have, like all known works of human art, directionality. But the Shroud of Turin has no directionality:

"Still further, the shroud image is nondirectional. Now if one is going to put paint on a cloth, one moves the hand from side to side. When one gets tired, one often starts moving the hand up and down. But even if one only moves from side to side all of the time, that is directionality. One cannot generally apply paint without directionality. If one uses a spray gun it still involves directionality. But there is no directionality on the shroud image." (Habermas, 1987, "Did Jesus Rise From The Dead?," p.119).

A mask was used for the face. ... The pigment was then artificially

[Above: The front body of the Shroud (L) compared with Garlaschelli's image (R): Reuters]

aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries. Note again "similar to" not "identical to"! And Garlaschelli's "the pigment on the original Shroud faded" is a tacit admission by him that there is no pigment on the Shroud of Turin:

"We do not have to know how somebody could have painted it, but science is adept at finding paint when it is present. But first, if the scientists have come up with one major conclusion, it is that the shroud is not a known fake. There is no paint, dye, powder, or other foreign substance on the image fibrils that could account for the image. Microchemical analyses revealed no paints or pigments ... A 1982 report from a team of scientists, released at a New London, Connecticut, meeting, states that, `No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found in the fibrils.' [Press Release, The Shroud of Turin Research Project, 8 October 1981] So again, we could falsify the shroud if there was paint. But they have not found any ... The shroud image does not appear to be painted at all." (Habermas, 1987, "Did Jesus Rise From The Dead?," p.119).

but there is pigment on his shroud. After all, what is Garlaschelli's "fuzzy, half-tone image" if it is not a residue of the "pigment containing traces of acid" that he applied and then mostly washed off his shroud?

They then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect. Here is a major difference between Garlaschelli's shroud and the Shroud of Turin. Garlaschelli "added blood stains" to his shroud after the image was created, but the blood on the Shroud of Turin is before its image, i.e. there is no image under its bloodstains (which fits the Shroud being Jesus' and its image being imprinted by His resurrection):

"Our hypothetical artist obviously must have used blood - both pre-mortem and post-mortem. And he had to paint with serum albumin alongside the edges of the scourge marks. Since serum albumin is visible only under ultraviolet, not white light, he had to paint with an invisible medium. If an artist had painted the Shroud, the blood must have been put on after the images. We decided to check that point. We took some blood- and serum-covered fibrils from a body image area. If the images were there before the blood, and if we removed the blood, we could expect to see straw-yellow image fibers. We prepared a mixture of enzymes that digest blood and its proteins. When all the blood and protein were gone, the underlying fibrils were not straw-yellow; they were ordinary background fibrils. This was strong evidence that the blood had gone on before the images. It suggested that blood had protected the linen from the image-making process. Surely this was a weird way to paint a picture." (Heller, 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," pp.202-203).

Shroud experts Dr John Jackson and Dr. Keith Propp also made this criticism of Garlaschelli's method, that on the Shroud of Turin, "the blood was on it first, then the body image came second" and "the blood contacted the shroud before the body":

"CNA spoke with Dr. John Jackson who runs the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado and is a physics lecturer at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Jackson led a team of 30 researchers in 1978 who determined that the shroud was not painted, dyed or stained. He explained to CNA that based off the Reuters report as well as photos of Garlaschelli's shroud on the internet, it appeared that it doesn't exactly match the Shroud of Turin. Dr. Jackson first questioned the technique used by Garlaschelli's team, taking issue with the method of adding blood after aging the cloth. Jackson explained that he has conducted `two independent observations that argue that the blood features on the shroud' show `that the blood was on it first, then the body image came second.' Dr. Keith Propp, a physicist who is also a colleague of Jackson's, told CNA that while Garlaschelli's shroud `does create an image that could've been done in medieval times,' there are a many things that `are not consistent with what the actual shroud shows us.' For example, he continued, we know that the blood contacted the shroud before the body `because there's no image beneath the shroud.' He added that this image pattern would be difficult to duplicate `because it would ruin the blood stains.' " ("Experts question scientist's claim of reproducing Shroud of Turin," Catholic News Agency, October 6, 2009).

Shroud photographer Barry Schwortz also noticed this major discrepancy (amongst others):

"It has been demonstrated scientifically that the bloodstains on the Shroud came from direct contact with a body and are all forensically accurate. It has also been shown that the bloodstains were on the Shroud BEFORE the image was formed since the blood and serum acted to inhibit the image formation mechanism. There is NO image under the blood and serum stains on the Shroud. However, to make this new `reproduction,' the `blood' was added (using a different pigment) AFTER the image was created. Obviously, it is much easier to add the blood to the image than to first create the blood stains and then create the forensically accurate image around them, which is exactly what a medieval forger would have had to do to duplicate the actual physical properties of the Shroud! Many of the bloodstains on the Shroud show a surrounding halo of serum stains that are ONLY visible with UV fluorescence photography. Also, the blood has been chemically analyzed and determined to include components of actual blood, NOT pigment."("Science by Press Release? An Editorial Response by Barrie Schwortz," Shroud.com, 7 October 2009. Emphasis original).

Excellent. Read the entire posting at The Shroud of Turin blog.

07:27 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

PZ Myers and the Shroud of Turin

Myers, who once asked readers of his blog to pilfer a consecrated host from a Catholic Mass (he called it a God Damned Cracker) so he could desecrate it, which he (thought he) did by nailing to a Quran and throwing it in the trash with coffee grounds, now writes:

I get thrown the miracle of the shroud of Turin on a regular basis — just last week someone confronted me with it, basically saying "A-ha! Jesus existed because there's an old scrap of cloth with a face on it!" It doesn't matter that I point out that it's been dated to the 13th century, and was nothing more than a profit-making 'relic' for churches that would also hawk Jesus's foreskin and John the Baptist's pinky bone. They'd usually retort that it was not humanly possible to make the shroud, so it had to be a religious miracle.

Now I've got more ammo. The Shroud of Turin has been recreated, using simple medieval technologies. No magic, just acidic pigments.

I know, it won't stop the kooks, but it's still useful to know.

More ammo? Kooks?

Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris. He writes one of the most fascinating and most popular evolutionary science blogs on the Internet. But he strays. He is vehemently anti-religious. When he strays he demonstrates a profound lack of knowledge about religion, an unparalleled fundamentalist-atheism agenda, and a knack to surrender all scientific principals.

Suppose some professor in Italy had claimed to find proof that the Theory of Evolution was wrong. Would Myers salute the claim without thinking. Of course not. And he shouldn’t. But this is just what he did with the claim that the shroud had been reproduced. It wasn’t of course. That has already been demonstrated. But Myers accepts the claim without any qualification.

I doubt very much that someone actually said, “A-ha! Jesus existed because there's an old scrap of cloth with a face on it!" The absurdity is obvious.

Myers is a good writer about biology. He should stick to what he know.

15:10 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Italian Fake Not 3D Like Shroud

It was widely reported in the media that the Italian Fake exhibited the same 3D aspects as the Shroud of Turin. You decide. Hint, the Italian fake is on the left. Find the nose. Parts of both cheeks protrude higher than the nose. It is hard to see that here but it has been confirmed with grayscale density measurement.

Of course, it could not have the subtle grayscale, given the method with which it was made. And if you are familiar with height-fields as used in computer graphics, you quickly realize it can not produce anything like the shroud image.

The press merely reported what Dr. Garlaschelli said without, it seems, taking a look.

These images are courtesy of Prof. Giulio Fanti at the University of Padua.

13:27 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Why the Italian Fake Does Not Reproduce the Shroud of Turin

Petrus Soons, a very gifted shroud scholar, has commented on the the Italian Fake. It is thoughtfully presented and warrants full consideration.

In the last few days, a story appeared in the mass media that an Italian professor of chemistry at the University of Pavia (Italy), reproduced the image on the Shroud of Turin using materials and methods that were available in the 14th century, concluding that the experiment proves the relic was man-made. Basically, he used a linen cloth in scale 1:1, that was baked at 215 degrees C for 3 hours and then put it in a washing machine with water only. Then they put a person dirtied with RED OCHRE (IRON OXIDE) on the linen and corrected by hand the colored image. A chalk bas relief was used for the face printing, liquid tempera simulated the blood and sulfuric acid at 1.2% in water added with Aluminium and Cobalt modified the linen surface. An artificial aging was the final treatment before the pigment was washed. The final goal was to show that it was possible to create a fake in the 14th century.

Now, there is nothing new to this. In 1979, Walter C. McCrone (1916-2002), an internationally recognized microscopist and the director of the famous McCrone Associates Research Laboratory in Chicago, reported that the Shroud image was due to the application of RED OCHRE, also known as Venetian red (an earth color) a red artist's pigment, which is a red IRON OXIDE, so probably Prof Garlaschelli took over this idea from Walter C. McCrone.

This theory was already disproved by the scientific STURP team (and others in the years after that) that conducted the investigations in 1978 on the Shroud of Turin.

Their conclusions were:

1) Adler reported that the " straw yellow color" of the body image fibers does not match the color of any of the known forms of ferric iron oxides.

2) Moreover, Adler reports that there is no correspondence of the body-only images to the concentration of iron oxide since the spectral characteristics of the body-only image are different from those of iron oxide.

3) The colors of the fibers, due to iron oxide, is also precluded by the fact that oxidation or reduction converts the yellow fibers of the body-only image to a white color.

4) Only rare particles of iron oxide are noted on the body-only image fibrils.

5) Large amounts of iron bound to the cellulose of the Shroud (not iron oxide) and Calcium were both present throughout the Shroud. This is believed to be due to the ability of linen to bind iron and water by ion association during the retting process (manufacturing process by which linen is immersed in water during fermentation). AN ESTIMATED 90 PERCENT of the iron and calcium exist in this form bound to the cellulose of the linen, AND ONLY A SMALL AMOUNT IS PRESENT AS IRON OXIDE.

6) X-ray studies of the body-only image do not contain enough iron oxide to show up on the X-radiographs.

7) All of the iron of the Shroud, whether from iron oxide particles or from blood, proved to be 99 percent chemically pure, with no discernable MANGANESE, NICKEL, or COBALT.

The earth pigment, RED OCHRE (Venetian red), from either medieval or older sources that were being used, was contaminated with manganese, nickel or cobalt GREATER THAN 1 PERCENT!!!

The STURP team employed microprobe Raman spectroscopy, mass spectroscopy, optical and infrared spectroscopy, micro FTIR spectroscopy, pyrolysis mass spectroscopy, X-ray and a variety of microchemical tests on the fibrils, and came to the conclusion that there was NO ochre or other pigments, dyes or stains on the fibrils of the Shroud.

Prof Garlaschelli told Republica he didn't think his research would convince those who have faith in the Shroud's authenticity. " They won't give up," he said. Those who believe in it will continue to believe."

Well, the reason why serious scientists do not believe Prof Garlaschelli's work has been explained.

Prof Garlaschelli explains the absence of any traces of iron oxide on the original Shroud by stating that the pigment on the original Shroud faded away naturally over the centuries. This is not a statement that you would expect from a serious scientist. The spectroscopic investigations being done in 1978 would even show the slightest traces of iron oxide present on the Shroud and it is a little bit "unscientific" to state that they disappeared "naturally."

Another little detail is the fact that on the original Shroud there is no image under the bloodstains, proving the fact that there were two image formation processes. Direct contact for the blood proper and another image formation process for the image itself. Prof Garlaschelli added the "blood" (liquid tempera) later on top of the image that he had created. Under Ultra Violet fluorescence photography (not known of course in the 14th century), the blood on the Shroud shows a serum separation, visible as a lighter ring around a darker center, which is typical of post mortem wound exudate. This is not visible with the naked eye. The proposed artist from the 14th century could of course not have known this fact, so he could not create it either.

Petrus Soons M.D.
Volcan
Panama

13:01 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Science by Press Release? An Editorial Response by Barrie Schwortz

This appears on the Barrie Schwortz’ Shroud of Turin Website:

I was away from my office and in Los Angeles yesterday when the story broke in the media that an Italian professor had "reproduced" the Shroud using techniques that were available in the 14th century. Although I didn't have my computer with me, my mobile phone rang again and again with friends calling to read me the story, so I heard the news almost immediately.

Upon my return late last night, my mailbox was flooded with e-mail, my answering machine was nearly full of messages and more than 20,000 people had visited the website since Tuesday morning. I finally was able to read the story myself at around 1:00 am.

Normally, I don't respond to this type of story, since the media rarely publishes the rebuttals anyway and the stories usually disappear by themselves after only a few days. In the end, giving it any attention at all usually only helps the author of the article and garners even more publicity for him because someone is publicly disagreeing with him. However, since so many viewers have written me, I decided to write this brief response in which I am expressing my own personal opinions on this topic. That is why I titled it an "Editorial" Response.

Frankly, knowing that the Shroud will go on public display again in around 6 months, I am not very surprised to see this type of story coming out, along with its resulting media coverage. This seems to happen every time the Shroud is about to go on public display. Yet whenever a serious scientific article about the Shroud is published in a peer reviewed journal, there is barely a ripple in the popular media. And now, once again, someone claims to have "reproduced" the Shroud, "proving" it is a medieval forgery. They made their claims via nothing more than a press release and got instant global media coverage. However, that is NOT the way science actually operates.

The author who made these claims states that he will make the details available "next week." In the real world of science, a researcher must perform his experiments, compile his data, draw his conclusions, write a formal paper and submit it to a scientific journal for peer review. The work is then examined by other experts, usually of the same discipline, before it is accepted for publication (or rejected). The data must provide a sound basis for the claims and be there from the beginning. Not "next week." And certainly not made public via a press release!

Sadly, in reviewing the article, it is apparent immediately that the author knows very little about the actual Shroud of Turin. He is not the first to suggest that the Shroud image was produced by red ochre pigment (iron oxide). In fact, he is at least the fourth to have proposed this theory in the last 30 years. Of course, this issue was anticipated by the STURP team in 1978 and a number of highly sensitive tests were performed that determined there was not enough iron oxide on the Shroud to be visible without a microscope. Iron oxide does not constitute the image on the Shroud. They also determined the image areas of the Shroud contain no more iron oxide than the non-image areas. It is more or less evenly distributed across the entire cloth.

Obviously, if the image were made in the manner detailed in the article, we would still find thousands of particles of iron oxide embedded into the image fibers of the linen and these would be clearly visible with just a good magnifying glass. Yet the microscopy done directly on the Shroud in 1978 revealed no such thing. These particles just don't go away on their own. STURP's instruments could detect parts per billion (a very small amount) of any substance on the Shroud and ALL known paints and pigments (including iron oxide) were excluded by the data. Interestingly, iron oxide is also a by-product of retting linen and the minute quantities found on the Shroud were pure and most likely the result of the retting process. The iron oxide used in red ochre pigment has many impurities and is rarely if ever found in its pure form.

I have stated on more than one occasion that making images on linen is relatively easy. However, making images on linen with the same chemical and physical properties as the Shroud is another story. Considering the massive amount of scientific data that now exists about the Shroud of Turin, anyone making claims such as these must submit their work for careful scrutiny and comparative analysis before drawing such dramatic conclusions. That has not been done in this case. Anyone making such claims must create an image with ALL the same chemical and physical properties as the Shroud, not just a few, if they wish to be taken seriously.

It has been demonstrated scientifically that the bloodstains on the Shroud came from direct contact with a body and are all forensically accurate. It has also been shown that the bloodstains were on the Shroud BEFORE the image was formed since the blood and serum acted to inhibit the image formation mechanism. There is NO image under the blood and serum stains on the Shroud.

However, to make this new "reproduction," the "blood" was added (using a different pigment) AFTER the image was created. Obviously, it is much easier to add the blood to the image than to first create the blood stains and then create the forensically accurate image around them, which is exactly what a medieval forger would have had to do to duplicate the actual physical properties of the Shroud!

Many of the bloodstains on the Shroud show a surrounding halo of serum stains that are ONLY visible with UV fluorescence photography. Also, the blood has been chemically analyzed and determined to include components of actual blood, NOT pigment.

A proper, detailed scientific response to this press release is now being drafted by the online Shroud Science Group and I hope to publish an in-depth article by true Shroud experts addressing these claims in the near future.

However, I would be remiss if I did not mention that the press release also stated the researcher "received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results." This is an interesting statement from someone representing a segment of the skeptical community that has frequently charged the STURP scientists with religious bias, implying that their data was somehow flawed because some of them happened to be Christians! Until such time that the data is made available so it can be properly examined and compared to the known data about the Shroud, I will not take these claims very seriously. And neither should you.

Barrie Schwortz
7 October 2009

05:41 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Latest from Italy

We should not be surprised that someone again has shown how a similar-looking, shroud-like image might be made. Prof Garlaschelli of the Italian Committee for Checking Claims on the Paranormal. It is the buzz all over the Internet. Here is one version:

Holy find Shrouded in doubt
New York Post Tue, 06 Oct 2009 03:42 AM PDT
ROME -- An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat he claims proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ's burial cloth is a medieval fake. The shroud bears the image, eerily reversed like...

Whoa. It isn’t even close. Here is a story from the Catholic News Agency (CNA):

Colorado Springs, Colo., Oct 6, 2009 / 09:27 pm (CNA).- An Italian scientist is claiming to have re-created the burial cloth believed to have covered the crucified body of Jesus, called the Shroud of Turin. However, CNA spoke with experts who maintain that there are still several major differences between the new shroud and the ancient one.

According to Reuters, Luigi Garlaschelli, an organic chemistry professor at the University of Pavia announced that he and his team “have shown it is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud.” The scientist plans to present his findings at a conference on the paranormal this weekend in Italy.

The Shroud of Turin is considered by many to bear an image of the face of Jesus Christ. Made of herring bone linen, the shroud is nearly four feet by 14 feet and bears faint brown discolorations forming the negative image of a crucified man.

The shroud’s positive image, revealed by modern photography, shows the outline of a bearded man. While skeptics contend that the shroud is a medieval forgery, scientists have been unable to explain how the image appeared on the cloth.

Garlaschelli and his team, who were funded by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics, created their image by placing the linen over a volunteer before rubbing it with a pigment called ochre with traces of acid.

The linen was then “aged” by heating it in an oven and washing it with water. Reuters reports that the team then added blood stains, burn holes and water stains to finalize their product.

CNA spoke with Dr. John Jackson who runs the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado and is a physics lecturer at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. Jackson led a team of 30 researchers in 1978 who determined that the shroud was not painted, dyed or stained. He explained to CNA that that based off the Reuters report as well as photos of Garlaschelli’s shroud on the internet, it appeared that it doesn’t exactly match the Shroud of Turin.

Dr. Jackson first questioned the technique used by Garlaschelli’s team, taking issue with the method of adding blood after aging the cloth. Jackson explained that he has conducted “two independent observations that argue that the blood features on the shroud” show “that the blood was on it first, then the body image came second.”

Dr. Keith Propp, a physicist who is also a colleague of Jackson's, told CNA that while Garlaschelli’s shroud “does create an image that could’ve been done in medieval times,” there are a many things that “are not consistent with what the actual shroud shows us.”

For example, he continued, we know that the blood contacted the shroud before the body “because there’s no image beneath the shroud.” He added that this image pattern would be difficult to duplicate “because it would ruin the blood stains.”

Another area concern for the scientists is the three dimensionality of the shroud.

Propp explained that while Garlaschelli’s cloth does have some aspects of light and dark to create a three-dimensional perspective, “it’s nowhere near as sophisticated as the shroud” and that “it misses out on the accuracy and subtleties that are in the actual image.”

Dr. Jackson from the Turin Shroud Center also touched on the same point, saying, “The shroud’s image intensity varies with” the distances in between the cloth and the body. While he admitted that the images of Garlaschelli’s shroud on the internet look authentic, when taken from a 3-D perspective, “it’s really rather grotesque.”

“The hands are embedded into the body and the legs have unnatural looking lumps and bumps,” he explained.

Jackson noted that he or his colleagues would be open to testing the Garlaschelli shroud or any other “idea about the shroud relative to the scientific characteristics that have been documented in respect to the shroud,” however to do so they would need “more detailed information about what was specifically done.”

Garlachelli’s technique has also received criticism from other experts. One scientist from the Shroud Science Group, a private forum of about 100 scientists, historians and researchers provided CNA with some of the critiques made in the forum.

One English-speaking expert explained that the blood used on the Shroud of Turin is not whole blood. “They didn't just go out and kill a goat and paint the blood on the cloth. The blood chemistry is very specific,” he said explaining that the blood is from “actual wounds.”

He added that most of the blood on the shroud flowed after death. “The side wound and the blood that puddles across the small of the back are post-mortem blood flows,” he said, adding that blood flowing after death “shows a clear separation of blood and serum.”

Propp added, “In some ways, it comes out better than most others I’ve seen before. Still there are too many things – the shroud is more than just the image.”

Jackson also pointed out that Garlaschelli’s findings have yet to be peer reviewed. What scientists need “to do is present their work for publication before their peers.”

He explained that any person can conduct his or her own research, but it doesn’t matter whether or not the author believes his or her hypothesis was proven. In the end, what the scientific community decides “upon seeing and reviewing the work” is what counts, he said.

Pope Benedict has announced that the Shroud will be open for public viewing in 2010 and that he is planning to visit the image at some point during its exposition.

The Catholic Church has not taken an official position on the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.

17:53 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Talk on Shroud of Turin Carbon Dating Problem by Los Alamos Scientist at Ohio State University

All five segments run about 40 minutes in total. It is well worth watching:

Shroud of Turin Ohio State University Villarreal Lecture Part 1 of 5 (Above)

Shroud of Turin Ohio State University Villarreal Lecture Part 2 of 5

Shroud of Turin Ohio State University Villarreal Lecture Part 3 of 5

Shroud of Turin Ohio State University Villarreal Lecture Part 4 of 5

Shroud of Turin Ohio State University Villarreal Lecture Part 5 of 5

11:20 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Nicholas Allen’s Ridiculous Photography Idea

allen The Weekend Post in Nelson Mandela Bay reports that Nicholas Allen expects to get some documentary coverage of his theory that continues to push his theory that “the Shroud of Turin is physical evidence that people understood at least the rudiments of primitive photography about five centuries before its accepted discovery in 1799 by Thomas Wedgewood.”

The theory is ludicrous. As one commenter wrote:

Allen's hypothesis is sheer nonsense. It has so many holes you could drive a truck through it, starting with how do you get back to back images on his hypothesis. Moreover, just try to get the cloth to body distance 3D effect using his mechanism? It won't work and then you have the problem of registry of the blood and image since the blood went on before the image.

Here is the article:

AN international television documentary on the controversial Shroud of Turin, which has just been completed, features the work of a Nelson Mandela Bay academic who has been researching the ancient relic for more than a decade.

The Shroud is purported to be the cloth in which the body of Jesus Christ was buried.

Professor Nicholas Allen‘s research resulted in a book in which he explained how the shroud, which appears to carry the imprinted form of Christ, was actually “the first photograph”.

Pioneer Studios from Hammersmith in London filmed the documentary on the mystery behind one of the Catholic Church‘s most important relics, and it will be aired by the Discovery Channel.

The Shroud of Turin was proved to be a 13th or 14th century forgery by carbon dating techniques in 1988 – but that scientific conclusion hasn‘t altogether dispelled the firm belief among many Christians that it is a holy relic.

Allen, formerly dean of the faculty of arts and design at the then Port Elizabeth Technikon, is a sculptor and art historian.

“The documentary is intended to offer a more balanced appraisal of the Shroud‘s import. Apparently another recent documentary was aired in the USA and gave the impression that the shroud was a miracle, so the Discovery Channel decided to commission Pioneer Studios to make a more objective documentary to counter this,” said Allen.

A number of researchers and historians were interviewed for the documentary, mostly Americans.

“I was asked to reconstruct my own experiments from the early 1990s and was also interviewed. My interview took place in the UK at a venue just outside Oxford. For this, I reconstructed a camera obscura, a screen for suspending the shroud and a gibbet for suspending a fibre-glass corpse.”

Allen started his research on the Shroud of Turin out of a passion for history and out of curiosity.

He said he chose his avenue of research because “nobody was looking at how a forgery was made. I started to find out how they did it.

“I started to look at it as a phenomenon and the obvious conclusion it was a photograph.

“Most of my research was based on published work by other researchers. I saw the Shroud of Turin for the first time at the new Millennium exhibition in 2000 in Italy.”

Allen‘s research was published as a thesis, and later in 1998, he published a book The Turin Shroud and the Crystal Lens: Testament to a Lost Technology.

Allen believes the Shroud of Turin is physical evidence that people understood at least the rudiments of primitive photography about five centuries before its accepted discovery in 1799 by Thomas Wedgewood.

In 1988, carbon dating was done by three institutions which came up with exactly the same conclusion that the linen of the shroud was grown between 1260 and 1390.

14:43 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Exhibition of the Shroud of Turin Coming to Birmingham, England

Peter Jennings in The Times:

A free exhibition on the Turin Shroud, the image believed to be the burial cloth of Jesus, will be held in Birmingham for week from this Saturday (Feb 21st) until next (Feb 28)

The Roman Catholic archbishop of Birmingham, the Most Rev Vincent Nichols is recommending a visit to The Cross, The Resurrection and the Shroud of Turin as “an excellent way to begin” Lent.

He said the exhibition, which he had visited in Little Aston in September helped visitors “enter more deeply into the sufferings of Our Lord.”

The Archbishop added: “I am delighted that this remarkable exhibition is coming to St Chad’s Cathedral.”

It has been put together by Pam Moon, lay minister at St Peter’s Anglican Church, Little Aston in the Diocese of Lichfield, where her husband, the Rev Phil Moon is vicar.

Full story: Free Turin Shroud exhibition to open in Birmingham -Times Online. Sourced for cross posting from A Blogspotting Anglican Episcopalian

17:53 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Discovery Channel to Broadcast Unwrapping the Shroud: New Evidence

The special will be rebroadcast on Sunday, February 1 at 9 p.m. Eastern and again at 1 a.m., four hours later. It will be broadcast on Discovery’s regular and HD channels.

This Shroud of Turin documentary was first shown in December and received numerous positive reviews. Part of it was recorded at Ohio State University during a conference of about 100 scientists, historians and other researchers last August.

Discovery is featuring the broadcast on their home page and that is warranted. In my opinion, it is the best documentary ever made about the shroud, even better than the 2002 PBS special. Watch it!

It clearly explains why the previous carbon dating has been shown to be invalid by peer-reviewed scientific studies including the work of Raymond Roger and subsequently a team of nine scientists at the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

If you have wondered about the shroud, this is an excellent production. Even if you are skeptical, it will help explain why many people believe it is genuine or are at least open to the possibility that it is.

See: Unwrapping the Shroud: New Evidence

12:11 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Blog Spotting the Shroud of Turin

James Wigderson writes at Wigderson Library & Pub: Evidence and faith:

Those interested in the debate surrounding the Shroud of Turin will be interested in the Shroud of Turin Blog.

Scientifically, we don't know the age of the Shroud of Turin. However, we do know it is at least twice as old as the now discredited carbon 14 date. As for the images, we have no idea how they are formed. But they were not made by any known artistic method.

The Atheist, the skeptic, the rationalist must accept the scientific facts just as any Christian should. To deny that the shroud is authentic requires a leap of faith. So does affirmation. But the evidence suggests that it is a late-Second Temple era burial shroud of a crucifixion victim. From that, much can be inferred.

We are in awe of that which cannot be explained except by accepting the miracle before us, regardless of its origin. The Shroud will be on display to the public in Turin in 2010.

05:58 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Absurd "The Shroud is a Fake" Article at Suite101.com

Shroud of Turin Blog nails it with Ridiculous ‘Shroud is fake’ article at Suite101.com

An absolutely ridiculous article appears at Suite101.com. The title is “The Shroud of Turin Debunked: A Forged Christian Relic.” There are two clues: 1) It cites a piece from a 2004 issue of Skeptical Inquirer which accused Public Broadcasting System (PBS) of burying the truth about the shroud and 2) it deals only with selective evidence.

Resting in the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy is a fourteen-foot-long linen cloth whose long history has been rife with controversy. Though believers in the shroud’s authenticity are undeterred by skeptics’ arguments, the bulk of the evidence indicates that the shroud is certainly a medieval forgery.

Well, let’s look at that evidence:

Biblical and Historical Evidence

Joe Nickell, in an article from the July/August 2004 issue of Skeptical Inquirer entitled “PBS ‘Secrets of the Dead’ Buries the Truth About Turin Shroud,” points out several facts that call the shroud’s authenticity into doubt. First of all, the Bible itself, specifically the Gospel of John, explicitly states that the crucified body of Jesus was wrapped in several cloths, including a separate cloth covering the face.

That is true, but totally irrelevant. Because there were several cloths, according to the Gospel of John, does not in any way rule out that one of those cloths might have been saved. There is no logic to such a statement. Moreover, this is selective use of gospel narrative by someone who also, elsewhere, debunks biblical narratives.

Second, the figure of Jesus on the shroud conforms to artistic representations of him from the fourteenth century; the body is elongated, as was common in Gothic art, and bears a striking resemblance to other depictions of Christ from that period.

Actually, that is a real stretch. The visual arts (paintings and sketches) of that period were very primitive and lacked anatomical precision found in the shroud. Moreover, at the time no artists would have painted the hand wounds in the wrists (they were always in the palms) or painted the body naked.

Third, and most damningly, there is no mention of the shroud in historical records at all until 1389. In that year, in a report to Pope Clement IV, a bishop openly admits the shroud was “cunningly painted” to perpetrate a “fraud” involving “pretended miracles.”

By the way, not 1389 but 1349.
Good grief! Most artifacts from antiquity lack written records that go back to their provenance. And as historians and archeologists well know, there are always gaps in records. In fact, there is a drawing of a shroud from 1192 in the Pray Codex found in the Budapest Museum (nearly a century earlier than the earliest carbon 14 date) that is clearly identifiable from particular features as the current Shroud of Turin. It is well known that a cloth with an image believed to be of Jesus existed in Edessa as documented by Eusebius of Caesarea in the early 4th century. According to Eusebius (and this must be considered legend) the cloth was brought to Edessa by the apostle Thomas or the disciple Thadeus. In 544 a cloth with an image thought to be of Jesus was found concealed above a gate in the city walls of Edessa. That cloth was transferred to Constantinople on August 14, 944. It was, at that time, described as a full-length burial cloth with an image of Jesus and bloodstains.
In 1204, following the sacking of Constantinople, it became the property of Othon de la Roche, the French Duke of Athens and Thebes. He sent it to his home in the town of Besançon, France in 1207. At Eastertide, it was removed from his castle and displayed in the Besançon Cathedral until the cathedral was destroyed by fire in March of 1349. Any records that might have existed may have been burned in that fire as all church records were destroyed (not an uncommon problem for historians). In that same year, Geoffroy de Charny, a French knight married Jeanne de Vergy, a grand-niece of Othon de la Roche, and delivered a/the shroud to the canons of Lirey, thereby creating the earliest extant record in Western Europe.
As for the memorandum of Pierre d’Arcis, the Bishop of Troyes, the letter is a draft piece and is believed by historians to refer to a painting that was made of the shroud and not the shroud, itself.

General Physical Evidence

The figure of Jesus has other unusual properties. For one thing, the image is not distorted, as it would be if it were the impression of a three-dimensional body wrapped in cloth; one has only to smear a napkin with mustard and press it against one’s face to see that the resulting two-dimensional image looks nothing like the figure on the shroud.

Actually, that presumes that the image is a contact image. Given that no one knows how the image was formed, the statement is not helpful. In fact, no one believes that the image is a contact image.

Christ’s hair hangs downward, like that of a standing person, and the suspiciously bright red “blood” on the shroud appears to be painted on top of the hair rather than saturated within it.

Image analysis shows that the hair does not hang down. There are two dark bands on each side of the face (that are not part of the face but run upward and downward beyond the face) and these create something of an optical illusion of hair hanging down. Nickell knows this but chooses to ignore it.

In addition, the cloth itself is a 3:1 herringbone twill, of which no examples have been found from the first century, when the shroud was supposed to have originated.

No have any sample of 3 over 1 herringbone twill been found in the medieval era.

Scientific Tests

Pieces of the shroud were carbon-dated in 1987 by three separate laboratories. All three — at Oxford, Zurich, and the University of Arizona — produced a date of origin circa 1260–1390, which is consistent with the time the shroud turned up in the historical record.

Actually the correct date is 1988, not 1987. All three labs ran the same tests on pieces of a single sample. No, all three labs did not arrive at the same date range. That is a statistical combination of the results from the three labs.
However, tests recently conducted at the Los Alamos National Laboratory by a team of nine scientists under the direction of Robert Villarreal confirm what chemist Raymond Rogers found and published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, Thermochimica Acta (Jan. 2005): The tested sample was not representative of the shroud’s cloth. Rogers’ findings had also been confirmed by Georgia Tech’s materials forensic chemist John L. Brown.
This is part of the problem in basing an article mostly on a single 2004 article. Research would have reveal this.

Tests of the “blood” were carried out by microanalyst Walter McCrone over a period of years, and the findings were consistent with the image being created with tempera paint.

Actually that statement is completely false. Walter McCrone did conclude that the bloodstains, and indeed the images, were painted, but it was not over a period of years. He wrote his conclusion in the same year that he carried out his microscopic inspection of fibers taken from the shroud.
However, Mark Anderson, who worked for McCrone, examined the fibers using laser microprobe Raman spectrometry and found that what McCrone thought was (inorganic) paint was in fact an organic substance. Previously, the shroud (and not just fibers) had been observed with visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and thermography. No paint was found. Later, pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry tests conducted at the Mass Spectrometry Center of Excellence at the University of Nebraska, on fibers examined by McCrone, were unable to detect any paint particles or painting medium.
Moreover, immunological, fluorescence and spectrographic tests, as well as Rh and ABO typing of blood antigens, reveal that the stains are human blood. Many of the bloodstains have the distinctive forensic signature of clotting with red corpuscles about the edge of a clot with a clear yellowish halo of serum. The heme was converted into its parent porphyrin, and the spectra examined. The bloodstains are blood. Microchemical tests for proteins were positive in blood areas. Much of this work is published in peer reviewed scientific journals including Archeological Chemistry: Organic, Inorganic, and Biochemical Analysis (American Chemical Society), Applied Optics and the Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences Journal.
Now, here we get slightly more current.

There has been enormous controversy over the scientific testing, with some authenticity advocates like the late Ray Rogers (writing in the May/June 2005 issue of Skeptical Inquirer) insisting that the carbon dating samples were contaminated. However, in light of the mountain of evidence pointing to forgery, and considering the fact that at least one modern artist has produced a comparable fake, it seems clear that the shroud, while a splendid artistic object, is nonetheless not the burial shroud of a savior that its believers wish it to be.

Actually, it is much more than Rogers. It is Brown and Villarreal and his team and Benford and Marino, etc. A good set of references for a current, carefully researched article would include material published in 2008.

Peer reviewed scientific journal: Chemistry Today (Vol 26, Num 4, Jul/Aug 2008), “Discrepancies in the radiocarbon dating area of the Turin shroud”, Benford M.S., Marino J.G.
Peer-reviewed conference paper (Aug 2008), “Analytical Results on Thread Samples Taken from the Raes Sampling Area (Corner) of the Shroud Cloth” Robert Villarreal (Paper and video presentation awaiting publication, see Ohio State University Shroud of Turin Conference Press Release)
Peer reviewed scientific journal: Thermochimica Acta (Vol 425, Jan 2005) “Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample from the Shroud of Turin”, Rogers, R.N.

You don’t need to believe it is real or that it is fake. But you have to do the research and use real facts in writing an article such as this.

17:18 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Christians Forums has interesting Shroud of Turin Discussion on Authenticity

Source: Shroud of Turin Blog, Interesting Shroud of Turin Discussion in Christians Forums. It does start out lame but then gets going.

It starts with this:

So… since it didn’t pop up until the 1300’s… whatcha think of this “cloth that was the burial shroud of christ”? Do you think it’s real? Sham? Somewhere in between?

It gets interesting when somebody calling himself OrthodoxyUSA chimes in. He is well informed. See Shroud of Turin - Christian Forums

17:12 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Shroud of Turin Copy Displayed at Anglican Church

From A Blogspotting Anglican Episcopalian

This story caught my attention. East Anglia Seminarians: Facsimile of the Shroud of Turin at Anglican Church

The East Anglia Seminarians report:

On Saturday we went to see one of four life-size facsimiles of the Shroud of Turin, which is on display in an Anglican church in Little Aston. It was bought for the vicar’s wife by a friend off Ebay, of all places! I went along, fairly indifferently I must admit, as I had already seen the Shroud in Turin some years ago and was never incredibly struck by subsequent pictures I had seen of it.
But the afternoon was a very wothwhile experience, largely because of the way the presentation was laid out. On first walking in we were confronted with the negative of the Shroud, which shows up much more clearly the scars and blood stains than the actual shroud does, and accompanied with this was scientific evidence of the shroud’s credibility, as well as quotes from the Scriptures that set the scene and turned the display into a meditation on the Passion. All the seminarians that came were visibly awed by what they saw and read. At the end of the display was the facsimile itself. I thought particularly poignant a piece of artwork which depicted the Cross, composed of the words of Psalm 22 (’All who see me mock at me,/ They make mouths at me, they wag their heads’).

From: Shroud of Turin Copy Displayed at Anglican Church « A Blogspotting Anglican Episcopalian

12:18 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Plant images on Shroud of Turin at Missouri Botanical Gardens

Source: Plant life traces on Shroud of Turin draws local interest

For decades, scientists have debated the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, believed to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ.
Two researchers were in St. Louis last week to present their findings on the shroud. The event was held at the Missouri Botanical Garden. Some 400 people attended.
Avinoam Danin, emeritus professor of botany at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, has spent years examining images of plant life discovered on the shroud.
He also has discovered additional pieces of plant life on the cloth, which has provided additional evidence to support his theory that the shroud was used somewhere in the area of Jerusalem.
Dr. Petrus Soons, a native of the Netherlands and retired doctor, has used digital photos of the shroud to create three-dimensional holograms, which have provided new and unique views of the cloth.
While neither Soons nor Danin attempted to prove that the image of the man found on the shroud indeed was that of Christ, both agreed that their research provides additional insight into the history of the cloth.

Plant life traces on Shroud of Turin draws local interest « Shroud of Turin Blog

12:14 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Rated Best New Shroud of Turin Website

Source: Best New Shroud of Turin Website

Be sure to check out this website, Shroud University. It is loaded with helpful resources including audio (and soon video) of the Ohio State University Shroud of Turin Conference presentations and open discussion forums.

Shroud University is a division of The Shroud of Turin Education Project, inc. and builds upon its original mission of providing the research tools necessary for students to explore this profound mystery. Is the Shroud of Turin a 2000-year-old relic of Jesus Christ or is it merely a medieval fake? It is a question that rivals “The Great Debate.”

This entry was posted

Best New Shroud of Turin Website « Shroud of Turin Blog

12:11 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Shroud of Turin Interest Linked to News

Interest in the Shroud of Turin in most cases is related to news about the Shroud. Here are the stats from Google Trends with identification of the flags and two other points:

A. Second face on the back of the shroud discovered (most interest)
B. Rogers’ paper that argues that the carbon dating sample was likely a repair
C. Shadow Shroud story on CBS (most news coverage)
D. Attention from the Winter Olympics in Turin
E. BBC documentary on the Shroud of Turin (little news, much interest)
F. Pope’s announcement that the shroud would be exhibited in 2010 (much news, little interest)
* 3rd Quarter if 2006, unknown story that generated no interest)
* Mid-August 2008, LA Times story about Jackson couple, minor news blip and very little interest.

Interest in the Shroud of Turin Linked to News « Shroud of Turin Blog

12:08 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

On the Ohio State University Shroud of Turin Conference

Long time shroud researcher Kevin E Moran has written a useful commentary on the Shroud of Turin Conference at Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. I completely agree with his assessment and it was good to see the VP8 demonstrated and to learn more about it.

This conference was far superior to the 2005 Dallas meeting organized by a Machiavellian lawyer collecting signatures for sale! This was a true international meeting held to accomplish cooperation, exchange meaningful information and work with old colleagues and new friends. It was as the organizer Joe Marino named it “multifaceted” It was truly open to the public. There were people from Australia, Canada, Israel, Italy, and other countries as well as a video greeting from Bill Meachem in Hong Kong. Rex Morgan, from Australia, gave an excellent over view of Shroud research history and projected the need for future work. There were 6 from the original 1978 investigators who spent 5 days and nights working on the Shroud in Turin, some gave papers and all participated in a panel session with questions from the audience. There was a new report on work on sample fibers from the late Ray Rogers by Los Alamos Scientific Lab. Avinoam Danin, botanist from

Opinion: On the Ohio State University Shroud of Turin Conference « Shroud of Turin Blog

11:53 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Scientist responds to Shroud of Turin story in the News and Observer

Dating the shroud - A scientist responds to the story in the News and Observer

T. V. Oommen writes in a letter published by the paper:

I am responding to the Aug. 29 article “Scientists debate shroud’s date.” As a scientist involved in the shroud’s study and research, and as a participant in the recent Ohio Shroud Conference where I made a presentation on “Shroud coins dating by image extraction,” I can emphatically say that there is plenty of evidence for the antiquity of the shroud as of first century origin.
There were several presentations on the erroneous dating of the shroud by the 1988 radiocarbon(C-14) dating. The area where the samples were taken was from a medieval patch with cotton, which appeared to blend perfectly with the linen shroud. If this is true, the main body of the shroud should show an ancient date. The theory that the entire shroud could show a more recent date because of the newer carbon generated during fiery events remains to be proven.
Some other scientists also propose similar views; for example, that powerful radiations from the resurrection event must have generated C-14. So another carbon dating of the shroud may not resolve the issue.
The coin identification I presented showed Pontius Pilate coins issued AD 30/31 placed on the eye area, which implies the shroud’s age is very close to that. Read more about it at www.ohioshroudconference.com.
T.V. Oommen
Raleigh

11:42 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

A Chemist's Perspective On The Shroud of Turin

There is a new book out by Ray Rogers.

Raymond N. Rogers was the head of the chemistry experiments for the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), the team of 24 researchers that performed the first ever in-depth scientific examination of the relic in 1978. He was a professional chemist for 52 years and spent 35 years as a research chemist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, until his retirement in 1988. Rogers shares his frank and often-unvarnished personal perspectives on his 30 year involvement in Shroud studies. He details his own research and backs it up with solid observations, chemical analysis and microscopy. He provides us with his own theory of the Shroud’s image formation and his own opinion on its authenticity. He discusses the role of religion and science and how each has impacted Shroud research. Most importantly, he discusses the possible future for the Shroud itself. Rogers’ unique perspective, straightforward style and in-depth knowledge will both inform and enlighten you. Includes 68 Color and B&W Illustrations.

11:17 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Atheist Tribe Uses Selective Science Facts to Judge the Shroud of Turin

We can encounter a statement like this at nogod.tribe.net in a post Does science make belief in God obsoleter:

I do find amusement with the "Shroud of Turin", as it has been shown to be from a different time, and even if it were not...there were plenty of crucifixions done back then, in the same way, but...that silly sheet just has to be the "son of god's", even though the image is of a much older man, lol.
Pure absurdity.

This is utterly unscientific -- my experience is that most skeptics only select evidence that favors their argument. First of all it has NOT been shown to be from another time. Here are Two Science Quotes on the Shroud of Turin

One:

There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow, and so further research is certainly needed. Only by doing this will people be able to arrive at a coherent history of the shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information.

Christopher Ramsey, head of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit which participated in the 1988 Carbon 14 Dating of the Shroud. ( May 2008 )

Two:

[T]he [1988 carbon 14] age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case.

Robert Villarreal, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) chemist who headed a team of nine scientists who at LANL examined material from the carbon 14 sampling region. ( August 2008 )

As for the comment that the shroud image is of a much older man, since when is a personal impression science. And as for it has to be "son of god," you win no point with the lower case - even grammatically I capitalize Atheist just as I would Christian), that is not so. We don't that, we can't know that, but there is room for inference. For more information on the carbon dating and history see: Shroud of Turin Fact Check

14:28 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Ohio Shroud of Turin Conference Abstracts Now Available

From the Papers Page on the conference site:

Abstracts: Thirty-one abstracts are now available.

Publication: No later than December 31, 2008, papers will be published online on this conference website. Papers received before that date will be published as they become available.

Subject Matter: Subject matter included anything related to the scientific, historical or theological aspects of the Shroud of Turin. Preference was given to papers with new material, i.e., that has not been presented at a conference or published previously elsewhere.

Length: Papers were be 30 minutes maximum, except those designated as “Special Presentations,” which may have been 1-hour long.

Shroud Science Group International Conference

13:43 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Two Science Quotes on the Shroud of Turin

One:

There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow, and so further research is certainly needed. Only by doing this will people be able to arrive at a coherent history of the shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information.

Christopher Ramsey, head of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit which participated in the 1988 Carbon 14 Dating of the Shroud. ( May 2008 )

Two:

[T]he [1988 carbon 14] age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case.

Robert Villarreal, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) chemist who headed a team of nine scientists who at LANL examined material from the carbon 14 sampling region. ( August 2008 )

For more information see: Shroud of Turin Fact Check

18:24 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Team of scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory confirm the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was invalid.

Using some of the most advanced analytical equipment available, a team of nine scientists at the famed Los Alamos National Laboratory confirmed that the material used for radiocarbon dating of the shroud in 1988 was not part of the shroud's fabric. Previously, micro-chemical tests had demonstrated that the cloth is at least twice as old as the medieval date determined by the now discredited carbon 14 tests. This gives new life to historical and forensic arguments that suggest that the shroud might be the burial cloth of Jesus.

PRESS RELEASE

COLUMBUS, Ohio, August 15 -- In his presentation today at The Ohio State University's Blackwell Center, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) chemist, Robert Villarreal, disclosed startling new findings proving that the sample of material used in 1988 to Carbon-14 (C-14) date the Shroud of Turin, which categorized the cloth as a medieval fake, could not have been from the original linen cloth because it was cotton. According to Villarreal, who lead the LANL team working on the project, thread samples they examined from directly adjacent to the C-14 sampling area were "definitely not linen" and, instead, matched cotton. Villarreal pointed out that "the [1988] age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case." Villarreal also revealed that, during testing, one of the threads came apart in the middle forming two separate pieces. A surface resin, that may have been holding the two pieces together, fell off and was analyzed. Surprisingly, the two ends of the thread had different chemical compositions, lending credence to the theory that the threads were spliced together during a repair.
LANL's work confirms the research published in Thermochimica Acta (Jan. 2005) by the late Raymond Rogers, a chemist who had studied actual C-14 samples and concluded the sample was not part of the original cloth possibly due to the area having been repaired. This hypothesis was presented by M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino in Orvieto, Italy in 2000. Benford and Marino proposed that a 16th Century patch of cotton/linen material was skillfully spliced into the 1st Century original Shroud cloth in the region ultimately used for dating. The intermixed threads combined to give the dates found by the labs ranging between 1260 and 1390 AD. Benford and Marino contend that this expert repair was necessary to disguise an unauthorized relic taken from the corner of the cloth. A paper presented today at the conference by Benford and Marino, and to be published in the July/August issue of the international journal Chemistry Today, provided additional corroborating evidence for the repair theory.

Blogging from Ohio State University at the Shroud of Turin Conference.

15:41 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Clueless on the Shroud of Turin (Science Musings Blog)

Chet writes in Science Musing Blog:

In the same issue of the Irish Times, the weekly science columnist, Dr. William Reville, Associate Professor of Biochemistry and Public Awareness of Science Officer at University College Cork, weighed in on the Shroud of Turin: Is the linen cloth with an image of the crucified Christ at Turin's cathedral the authentic burial cloth of Jesus or a medieval forgery? Reville ostensibly adopts an open-minded attitude, but his credulity is breathtaking. He recommends reading Is the Turin Shroud a Fake? by Ian Wilson and Barrie Schwortz, one of countless book supporting the Shroud cult, without directing his readers to a more skeptical source. I would have thought the issue was pretty much settled by the 1988 radiometric tests reported in Nature, but it's not in the cards that any scientific evidence -- or application of Ockham's Razor -- will dissuade true believers.

I am surprised how little the author knows about the literature. The 1998 tests have been shown to be quite worthless. The material that was tested has been shown to be chemically unlike the rest of the shroud. For instance . . .

The samples contained vanillin in significant quantities (about 37%) whereas the rest of the shroud does not. In fact, a Philip Ball writing in Nature in 2005 acknowledged, this demonstrates that the shroud is at least twice as old as the radiometric tests indicate. (I guess it's not in the cards that any scientific evidence -- or application of Ockham's Razor -- will dissuade true skeptics).
Alan Adler at Western Connecticut State University found large amounts of aluminum in yarn segments from the radiocarbon sample, up to 2%, by energy-dispersive x-ray analysis. Why aluminum? That was an important question because it is not found elsewhere on the Shroud. (alum is likely the culprit. it is a mordant used in dying).
The radiocarbon lab at the University of Arizona conducted eight tests. But there was a wide variance in the computed dates and so the team in Arizona combined results to produce four results thus eliminating the more outlying dates (reportedly they did so at the request of the British Museum, which was overseeing the tests). Even then, according to Remi Van Haelst, a retired industrial chemist in Belgium, the results failed to meet minimum statistical standards (chi-squared tests). Why the wide variance in the dates? Was it because of testing errors? Or was it because the sample was not sufficiently homogeneous? The latter seems very likely now, and the statistical anomaly indicates something very suspicious about the samples.
Bryan Walsh, a statistician, examined Van Haelst’s analysis and further studied the measurements. He concluded that the divided samples used in multiple tests contained different levels of the C14 isotope. The overall cut sample was non-homogeneous and thus of questionable validity. Walsh found a significant relationship between the measured age of various sub-samples and their distance from the edge of the cloth. Though Walsh did not suggest invisible reweaving, it is consistent with his findings.
Giovanni Riggi, the person who actually cut the carbon 14 sample from the Shroud stated, "I was authorized to cut approximately 8 square centimetres of cloth from the Shroud…This was then reduced to about 7 cm because fibres of other origins had become mixed up with the original fabric …" (emphasis mine)
Giorgio Tessiore, who documented the sampling, wrote: “…1 cm of the new sample had to be discarded because of the presence of different color threads.” (emphasis mine)
Edward (Teddy) Hall, head of the Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratory, had noticed fibers that looked out of place. A laboratory in Derbyshire concluded that the rogue fibers were cotton of “a fine, dark yellow strand.” Derbyshire's Peter South wrote: “It may have been used for repairs at some time in the past…”

We certainly don't know how old the cloth is. Certainly the 1988 tests do not tell us.

Chet concludes:

If Dr. Reville takes at face value that a man can rise from the dead and pass through walls, then why not an authentic Shroud of Turin or a six-day creation. If you believe one miracle, then why not all?

And this is from someone claiming to be writing about science? First of all, the resurrection is a statement based on faith. The interpretation in Christianity varies from true miracle to spiritual representation. It is not based on scientific claims of any kind. It is recognized to be "scientifically" impossible.

The evidence for the age of the universe, the earth as well as the evolution of species is based on good science. Granted, some Christians do not accept it. I do. But the age of the shroud is not based on good science.

Science Musings Blog

14:43 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Shroud of Turin Conference at Ohio State University

News Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Latina A. D. Rockhold

(614) 688-3310

[email protected]

New Data at International Shroud of Turin Conference Precedes Exhibition in Turin

COLUMBUS, Ohio, June 24 — An international conference on the Shroud of Turin to be held at The Ohio State University will reveal new information regarding the controversial 1988 Carbon-14 (C-14) dating of the cloth believed by many to be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. The 1988 test gave the putative results at A.D. 1260–1390, but they were immediately questioned by many scientists as being inconsistent with other accumulated data on the Shroud. The Vatican recently announced that the Shroud will be exhibited in Turin in the spring of 2010, when millions are expected to see it. New evidence will be presented at the conference summarizing recent work by seven independent scientists of a world-renowned American research facility on Shroud samples adjacent to ones used in the 1988 dating. The research indicates that the area from which the C-14 samples were taken is chemically different from the main part of the Shroud, confirming research published in 2005 by a scientist who had studied actual C-14 samples. Due to the sensitive nature of the research and of the work of the research facility, the speaker and paper will only be announced at the conference.

“The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma” will be held Aug. 14–17, 2008, at The Blackwell Hotel, 2110 Tuttle Park Place, on the grounds of The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. The conference, which is open to the public, is being organized by the Shroud Science Internet Group, composed of about 100 scientists, scholars, and researchers from around the world.

The conference will also include presentations from five members of The Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), which had studied the most intensely-studied artifact in human history for five days in 1978. None of the data collected by the group suggested the Shroud could be a forgery. If the 1988 C-14 test results were accurate, the Shroud could not be the actual burial cloth of Jesus.

However, in 2005, a member of STURP, the late Raymond Rogers, who was given access to leftover samples from the 1988 testing, authored a paper published in Thermochimica Acta in which he presented evidence that the sample used in the testing was not part of the original cloth possibly due to the area having been repaired. Rogers believed his evidence invalidated the C-14 test. While some researchers have challenged Rogers findings, there have been no rebuttals in peer-reviewed scientific literature. Several new papers are being presented at the conference that will provide corroborating evidence for the repair theory, including two by M. Sue Benford (43016) and Joseph Marino (43016) whose paper at an international conference in Orvieto, Italy, in August 2000 prompted Rogers to undertake the research that led to his 2005 paper. One of the two papers by Benford and Marino will be published in Chemistry Today shortly after the conference.

Furthermore, speakers will present the findings of scientific analysis of dusts and particles collected during the 1988 C-14 testing. In addition, there will be a paper by The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Department of Evolution, Systematics, and Ecology Professor of Botany, Avinoam Danin, Ph.D., who presented evidence at the 16^th International Botanical Congress in St. Louis in 1999 that suggested that the C-14 test in 1988 had been invalid. Dr. Danin, whose research places the Shroud's geographical origin in the Middle East. will present new botanical evidence that raises new questions about the Shroud's image-formation process.

For more information regarding the conference, which commemorates the 30^th anniversary of the 1978 STURP study and the 20^th anniversary of the C-14 dating of the Shroud, or to register, visit ohioshroudconference.com. Registration is also available by visiting ced.osu.edu/CED_conference.html or calling the Office of Continuing Education at (614) 292-8571.

The Department of Conference Management in The Ohio State University Office of Continuing

Education (CEd) specializes in providing meeting and conference management services — from pre-conference concept to post-conference follow-up — on a cost-effective basis to the university community as well as to private and public businesses and associations. For more information on CEd’s Conference Management services, visit ced.osu.edu and click on “Conference Management,” or contact Sarah Sieling in the Office of Continuing Education at (614) 292-8571.

###

14:33 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Buffalo News: Camp Inquiry encourages children's skeptical side

The problem is that Joe Nickell, mentioned here, has no comprehension of the scientific method. From an obviously spoon fed story in the Buffalo News:

Twenty-seven campers spent the past week following in the footsteps of Charles Darwin, digging up fossils and learning how to face moral dilemmas.
Paranormal and forensic investigator Joseph Nickell, of Discovery Channel and National Geographic Channel fame, paid a visit Wednesday morning to explain away alien sightings, Bigfoot, crop circles and the Shroud of Turin.
“The best way to find the truth in such matters is the scientific method,” said Nickell, who urged kids to respond to claims, myths and urban legends by demanding proof.

Joe Nickell is not a scientist. That is not a criticism. He has a PhD in literature from the University of Kentucky and he is a skilled writer. According to Nickell, not being a scientist is advantageous as researcher or investigator.

In an article entitled, “An Interview With Joe Nickell,” Eric Krieg of the Philadelphia Association for Critical Thinking, describes Nickell (using Nickell's own words) as an “investigator” and formerly an “undercover detective, teacher, draft dodger, river boat manager, carnival promoter, magician and spokesperson.”

“Joe [Nickell] impressed on me the difference between being a scientist and an investigator,” Kreig continued. “Joe seems to have no significant credentials . . . Joe [Nickell] remarks that a scientist tends to approach an investigation from the narrow view of his own specialty - where as a ‘jack of all trades’ would come up with more avenues of investigation.”

Joe Nickell is a skeptic when it comes to the Shroud of Turin. There is no question about that. Nor is that a criticism. What needs to be questioned, however, are his methods, those things he writes as "facts" and the conclusions he draws.

The aim of the thoughtful skeptical inquirer is not to achieve this or that outcome. Rather the aim of the true and honest skeptical inquirer is an open mind, careful analysis and proper use of sources.

Everyone should read a recent Joe Nickell's article "Claims of Invalid “Shroud” Radiocarbon Date Cut from Whole Cloth" and the criticisms of this article that follow. Everyone should judge for himself or herself.

Poisoning the Well

Camp Inquiry encourages children's skeptical side : City & Region : The Buffalo News

05:49 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

The Buffalo News: Camp Inquiry encourages children's skeptical side

The problem is that Joe Nickell, mentioned here, has no comprehension of the scientific method. From an obviously spoon fed story in the Buffalo News:

Twenty-seven campers spent the past week following in the footsteps of Charles Darwin, digging up fossils and learning how to face moral dilemmas.
Paranormal and forensic investigator Joseph Nickell, of Discovery Channel and National Geographic Channel fame, paid a visit Wednesday morning to explain away alien sightings, Bigfoot, crop circles and the Shroud of Turin.
“The best way to find the truth in such matters is the scientific method,” said Nickell, who urged kids to respond to claims, myths and urban legends by demanding proof.

Poisoning the Well

Camp Inquiry encourages children's skeptical side : City & Region : The Buffalo News

05:28 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Pope Apologizes for Clerical Sexual Abuse

SYDNEY (Catholic Online) - His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI today delivered a heartfelt apology to the victims of sexual abuse by clergy in Australia.

Departing from his official homily, the Holy Father said: “Indeed, I am deeply sorry for the pain and suffering the victims have endured, and I assure them that as their Pastor, I too share in their suffering.”
The apology was delivered during a special service at St Mary’s Cathedral – the Dedication of a new altar before seminarians and other young religious people.

The Pope consecrated (blessed) the new white marble altar, featuring an image of the body of Jesus Christ, based on the sacred Shroud of Turin. As he addressed the full cathedral and forecourt, he used the new altar to highlight their role.

World Youth Day 2008 - Catholic Online

12:20 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Examining the Shroud on GodTube

WATCH: The Shroud of Turin, the piece of cloth that is alleged to be the burial garment of Christ, is one of the most widely studied relics in the entire world. Scientists from 67 different academic studies ...

14:41 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Why the face of the Shroud of Turin?

Perceptively, Raul Nidoy from Makati City, Philippines writes in his blog:

When we see the face of Christ, why should we emphasize the particular face of Christ in the Shroud of Turin and not just a more comprehensive searching for his face, his personality, his expressions, his look, the self shining out through his words?

The answer lies in to the reply to the question on why three of the universal sacraments have a symbolic force limited to the Mediterranean region: olive oil, bread, wine.

Christ chose mediterranean symbolism. Why? Ratzinger reasoned out in his book Spirit of the Liturgy: God's incarnation binds us to the history of a particular place. It does not mean doing as we please, a typical tendency of those who want to invent a new liturgy, or new sacraments. No. "The elements become sacraments through connection with the unique history of God in relation to man in Jesus Christ."

See Benedict the Wise: Why the face of the Shroud of Turin?

00:38 | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Updated Shroud of Turin Conference Schedule, Ohio State University

Conference schedule as of 4 July 2008

Thursday, August 14, 2008
5:00-7:00 p.m. On-site registration
6:45-7:00 Opening remarks
7:00-8:30 Opening address: The Shroud: An Eternal Challenge by Rex Morgan, Shroud Science Group member
8:30-8:45 Break
8:45-9:00 A Tribute to STURP by Barrie Schwortz, STURP documenting photographer and Shroud Science Group member
9:00-10:00 Informal gathering in Ballroom (Refreshments provided)
Friday, August 15, 2008
7:00-9:00 a.m. On-site registration
8:00-9:30 Breakfast (provided by Hotel)
8:30-8:45 Opening remarks
8:45-9:15 The STURP Experience by Thomas D’Muhala, former President of STURP
9:15-9:45 The Sudarium of Oviedo: A Study of Fiber Structures by Raymond Rogers, STURP member and Shroud Science Group member, read by Joanna Emery.
9:45-10:15 VP-8 Shroud Image Analysis, Impact and History by Peter Schumacher
10:15-10:45 My White Linen White Paper by Kenneth Stevenson, STURP member and Shroud Science Group member
10:45-11:00 Visibility of the Shroud Image: An Optical Physicist’s Perspective by John Dee German, STURP member
11:00-11:30 The Spectroscopy of Various Candidate Processes Associated with Image Formation and Features of the Shroud of Turin
Redux (what we might have seen if we did it right) by Joseph Accetta, STURP member
11:45-12:00 Question and Answer session with STURP members
12:00-1:30 Lunch (provided by Hotel)
1:30-2:00 Digital Image Analysis of the Shroud of Turin
: An Ongoing Investigation by Raymond J. Schneider, Shroud Science Group member
2:00-2:30 A Physical Hypothesis on the Origin of the Body Image embedded into the Turin Shroud by Paolo Di Lazzaro
2:30-3:00 Shroud Coins Dating By Image Extraction by T.V. Oommen
3:00-3:30 Revisiting The Right Eye Image: What is it? By Dr. Alan and Mary Whanger, Shroud Science Group members
3:30-4:00 Aspects of The Shroud in Botany and Related Art By Dr. Alan and Mary Whanger, Shroud Science Group members
4:00-4:22 Body Image Formation Hypotheses Based on Corona Discharge: Discussion by Giulio Fanti, Shroud Science Group Member
4:23-4:45 Resolution of images obtained without an acquisition system using MTF by Giulio Fanti, Shroud Science Group member and Roberto Basso
4:46-5:08 Statistical analysis of dusts taken from different areas of the Turin Shroud
by Giulio Fanti, Shroud Science Group member and Roberto Basso
5:09-5:29 Scourge bloodstains on the Turin Shroud: an evidence for different instruments used by Barbara Faccini, Shroud Science Group member, read by Giulio Fanti
5:30-6:00 Questions and Answers--afternoon speakers
6:00-8:00 Dinner (not provided by hotel)
8:00-9:00 Informal presentation: History of the Holy Grail by Daniel C. Scavone
9:00-10:00 Judging of Student Posters

Saturday August 16, 2008

8:00-9:30 a.m. Breakfast (provided by Hotel)
8:30-8:45 Opening remarks
8:45-9:15 What Went Wrong with the Shroud's Radiocarbon Date? Setting it all in context by Paul Maloney, Shroud Science Group Member
9:15-9:45 Overview of and New Findings for Historical and Scientific Evidence Pertaining to Possible “Invisible Mending” of the C-14 area of the Turin Shroud by Joseph G. Marino, Shroud Science Group member and M. Sue Benford
9:45-10:15 Surface chemical analysis of the Shroud of Turin identifies discrepancies in Radiocarbon Dating Region by M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, Shroud Science Group member
10:15-10:45 SPECIAL PRESENTATION TO BE ANNOUNCED
10:45-11:15 SEM-EDXA Analysis of Red Particles Removed from the Underside of the Turin Shroud in 1988 by Parr RL, Reguly B, MacKenzie A, Merriwether DA, Benford MS, Baraldi P, and Fanti G
11:15-11:45 Questions and Answers--morning speakers
11:45-1:15 Lunch (provided by Hotel)
1:15-1:45 Neutron Radiation Effects on Linen Fibers and Consequences for a Radiocarbon Dating by Francesco Barbesino & Mario Moroni, read by Giulio Fanti
1:45-2:15 A Global Forensic Analysis of the Elements of the Shroud of Turin: Compatibility Between the Evidences of Vitality and the Absence of Signs of Death on the Cloth by Dr. Miguel Lorente
2:15-2:45 The death of the Shroud Man: an improved review by Barbara Faccini, Shroud Science Group member, read by Giulio Fanti
2:45-3:15 The Shroud of Turin , The Holographic Experience by Petrus Soons
3:15-3:45 Botany of the Shroud of Turin by Avinoam Danin
3:45-4:15 Ancient Edessa and the Shroud: History Concealed by the Discipline of the Secret by Jack Markwardt
4:15-4:45 On Besancon and Other Plausible Theories for the Shroud During the Missing 150 Years, 1204 to 1355 by Daniel C. Scavone, Shroud Science Group member
4:45-5:10 Was Sixth-Century Desertification a Factor in the Transfer of Relics from Palestine by Diana Fulbright, Shroud Science Group member
5:10-5:30 A Note on “the Servant of Peter” by Diana Fulbright, Shroud Science Group member
5:30-6:00 Questions and answers--afternoon speakers
6:00-8:00 Dinner (provided by Hotel)
8:00-10:00 GENERAL OPEN FORUM: Twenty Years After – Where Do We Stand with the Carbon dating? moderated by Barrie Schwortz, Shroud of Turin Research Project Documenting Photographer and Shroud Science Group member
SUNDAY, AUGUST 17, 2008
8:00-9:30 a.m. Breakfast (provided by Hotel)
8:30-9:00 Jesus Christ, the Man of the Shroud, and Bilirubin by Carlo Goldoni, read by Roberto Basso
9:00-9:30 Advancing the Shroud into the 21^st Century: Reaching the next generation by Russ Breault, Shroud Science Group member
9:30-10:00 Focus Projects for Student Involvement in Researching the Scientific Properties of the Shroud of Turin by Raymond J. Schneider, Shroud Science Group member
10:00-11:00 GENERAL OPEN FORUM: The 2002 “Restoration” – its Impact and Prospects for Future Testing (and miscellaneous topics) moderated by Barrie Schwortz, Shroud of Turin Research Project Documenting Photographer and Shroud Science Group member
11:00-11:30 The Tangible Emmanuel: How the Scriptures Shed Light on the Meaning and Presence of the Shroud of Turin by Chris Knabenshue
11:30 Closing remarks; End of Conference

11:24 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Fabric Of Time - 2007 5 of 6 - Shroud of Turin

Shroud of Turin - Fabric of Time -2007
Holographic and forensic proofs.
Aba Joshua.
The greatest SHAMAN and the highest MAGUS

Shroud of Turin - Fabric Of Time - 2007 5 of 6 | Video Digs

12:56 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

wunderkammer: The Shroud of Turin

This is an interesting, well written posting:

. . . Various tests have been performed on the shroud, yet the debates about its origin continue. Radiocarbon dating in 1988 by three independent teams of scientists yielded results published in Nature indicating that the shroud was made during the Middle Ages, approximately 1300 years after Jesus lived. Follow-up analysis published in 2005, however, indicated that the sample dated by the teams was taken from an area of the shroud that was not a part of the original cloth. This analysis itself is questioned by skeptics such as Joe Nickell, who reason that the conclusions of the author, Raymond Rogers, result from "starting with the desired conclusion and working backward to the evidence". Former Nature editor Philip Ball has said that the idea that Rogers steered his study to a preconceived conclusion is "unfair" and Rogers "has a history of respectable work". As of 2005, there is no universally accepted carbon dating result for the shroud in the scientific literature. . .

Read the entire posting.

14:45 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Examining the Shroud of Turin at Catholic Board

John Iannone was interviewed on Catholic Answers LIVE radio on June 12, 2008. He is the author of The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence (Alba House, 1998), a book that examines the famous “Shroud of Turin,” which some claim to be the actual ancient burial cloth of Jesus. In this interview, Iannone discusses the remarkable, unexplainable, and mysterious qualities scientists have discovered in their multiple examinations of the Shroud. Is the Shroud a medieval hoax - a unique forgery - or might it possibly be the actual cloth that enshrouded Jesus when he was buried in the garden tomb nearly two-thousand years ago? You’ll be fascinated by what you discover in this unique episode of Catholic Answers LIVE

Link to broadcast. Examining the Shroud of Turin at CatholicBoard - Knowing, Loving, and Living the Faith

05:11 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Marlene Dumas: Measuring Your Own Grave On view at MOCA Grand Avenue through September 22, 2008

Edward Goldman is an art critic and the host of Art Talk, a program on art and culture for NPR affiliate KCRW 89.9 FM. He writes:

Marlene Dumas' powerful and eloquent art repudiates premature statements made by some art authorities about the demise of painting as the primary medium of artistic expression in the 21st century. As long as we are able to evoke the image of the Shroud of Turin and the Veil of Sainte Veronique, painting will remain with us.

Is he saying that Shroud of Turin is a painting? It seems so. But we can't be certain.

13:41 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Believing the Shroud of Turin is genuine is a far cry from knowing it. But from peer-reviewed scientific journals, alone, we can reasonably infer it is real. Adding historical records makes for a good recipe for believing.

Recent Posts on the Shroud of Turin Blog

Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin

This appears on the Barrie Schwortz’ Shroud of Turin Website:

Biblical and Historical Evidence

General Physical Evidence

Scientific Tests

Conference schedule as of 4 July 2008

Shroud links

Google

Second Face

Blogroll - SSG Members

Recent Posts