Shroud of Turin Important links
Holy Shroud important links
In 1988 a now famous carbon-dating of the Turin Shroud was carried out. the three laboratories staged a combined press conference in which they announced that they had arrived at a date in the middle Ages.
This was eagerly siezed upon by the Media. But there are problems...
After testing was concluded, the researchers announced that all three research groups had dated their cloth snippets to a time between 1260 and 1390—evidence that the shroud was not from the time of Christ. But there was a problem with the findings—the Vatican, which owns the shroud, refused to allow other researchers access to the data. In this new effort, the research team sued the University of Oxford, which had the data, for access—and won. After studying the data for two years, the new research team announced that the study from 1988 was flawed because it did not involve study of the entire shroud—just some edge pieces. Edge pieces from the shroud are seen to have been tampered with by nuns in the Middle Ages seeking to restore damage done to the shroud over the years. In a recent interview with L"Homme Nouveau, Tristan Casabianca, team lead on the new effort, claimed that the raw data from the 1988 tests showed that the test samples were heterogeneous [not from the same source], invalidating the results
The new test, by scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy, used the same fibers from the 1988 tests but disputes the findings.
The new examination dates the shroud to between 300 BC and 400 AD, which would put it in the era of Christ.
The man on the Shroud was crowned with thorns (no other man crucified in history was ever crucified with a crown of thorns . That is unique to Jesus and the shroud
Danin's analysis suggests that flowers and other plant materials were placed on the Shroud of Turin, leaving pollen grains and imprints of plants and flowers on the linen cloth. In addition to the image of a crucified man, the cloth also contains faint images of plants. Tentatively identifying the plant images through a method of image comparison known as Polarized Image Overlay Technique (PIOT), Alan and Mary Whanger have reported that the flowers were from the Near East region and that the Shroud originated in early centuries. Analysis of the floral images by Danin and an analysis of the pollen grains by Uri Baruch identify a combination of certain species that could be found only in the months of March and April in the region of Jerusalem during that time.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/rel.../1999/08/990803073154.htm
The Sudarium is a piece of linen cloth, 34 by 21 inches, thought to have been used to cover the head of Jesus immediately after the crucifixion (John 20:7). Unlike the Shroud, the Sudarium does not display an image. The Sudarium contains male blood of type AB, however, which matches the blood on the Shroud
Moreover, the patterns of blood flow on the Sudarium are consistent with those of a crucified man
https://www.google.com/.../shroud-turin-jesus-christ.../amp/
This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date."
Five years of tests by the Enea demonstrates a low probability that the Shroud is a medieval fake, allowing it to be presented as a scientific challenge. The testing methods used were strips of modern-day linen and an ultraviolet apparatus. "The best method used depended on laser pulses that lasted less than 50 nanoseconds
No modern technology can recreate it
Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/316570#ixzz6S6gQVesr
PHYS.ORG
Study of data from 1988 Shroud of Turin testing suggests mistakes
This is just one of the lines of evidence. The original protocol for the 1988 test required three pieces to be taken from different places on the shroud. In the event, only one piece was taken, near the bottom edge. Examination of the cloth shows that they took it from a patch that had been skilfully sewn on. Murphy's Law had exploited the loophole. Further, the three labs were supposed to work independently, and were to be given two or three sample (I forget how many) so that they did not know which piece was the shroud. In the event they were aware which sample was the shroud, and they were allowed to collaborate before publishing the findings.
The date they settled on was an average, but in fact the original data shows a very great spread. I {Micheál Ó Fearghail – see facebook] have done this kind of work myself (on mangrove seedlings) and there are statistical procedures. The spread of the original figures (which are available on the internet) are much too wide for the average figure to have validity. Suppose you took three samples of a man’s weight. If they came to 138, 140, 142, then an average of 140 would be reasonable. But if you had 100, 140, 180, you would still get a mean of 140, but the spread – the chi-squared – would be much too wide.
We now know that the reason for the wide spread is that the samples sent to the 3 labs had different fractions of the Mediaeval patch over the original cloth.
Finally, the labs rushed into a press conference with their date, without collaborating with the other studies. In fact, every other study (the type of fabric, the pollen, the dust on the feet) contradicts this study and points to the First Century. But of course it was the flawed experiment that got all the media attention.
=
Then there is the question of the actual image. It is no good to simply say breezily that it is a Mediaeval forgery…. exactly how was it put on the cloth? There is no trace of paint or ink. Instead, the very top of the individual fibres is nodulised by a process so far unknown.
And how could any human artist have thought of painting it in photographic negative?
There must have been some natural process.
The VP-8 Analyser has shown that the image contains 3-D information. No painting in the world has this. The image is compatible with parallel radiation travelling straight upwards and downwards.
It can be speculated what kind of radiation – but no process currently known to science can reproduce it.
I am not in this paragraph jumping to conclusions: I am simply recording the empirical evidence.
The Shroud is part of our world, and Reality is a Whole – it is coherent.