[cuban leaf]

Shocked. Yes. I’m shocked.

[Mr. K]

Well I guess that settles it. They ‘might not be’ ...

[Blue House Sue]

The 13th century forgers could not have predicted the forensics technology of the 21st century.

[VaeVictis]

Meh, I never put any stock into that thing anyways.

[Dogbert41]

To bad the original scientists that actually were given hands on access to the shroud disagree. Plenty of youtube videos of thoe few still living discussing this.

[dangus]

Dumb. Jesus was taken down from the cross. Why would anyone expect he was laid flat on the ground, and not wrapped in the shroud as he was taken down from the cross? What the researcher means is “the blood flows don’t match the way I wrapped him.”

[butlerweave]

It’s a piece of Art

[karnage]

The Shroud of Turin, as with any holy relic, is supposed to facilitate the Christian’s interaction with God. Its contemplation can help one contemplate the suffering of Jesus Christ, who died for our sins.

[MUDDOG]

"This isn't the Middle Ages anymore."

I didn't expect a kind of Middle Ages.

[ealgeone]

And we know His blood type just how??

[georgiegirl]

A big HOWEVER the headline misses:

Jonathyn Priest of Bevel, Gardner and Associates Inc. in Norman, Oklahoma, who is a bloodstain pattern expert, said that while the science and the methodology used in the study were sound, they may not be accounting for when the body was moved such as being carried and prepared for burial.

Priest also told BuzzFeed that the amount of blood from the wrists on the shroud would "more than likely" have needed the heart to have been beating at the time the bloodflow formed, however.

[longfellow]

Everytime these scientists try to prove the shroud fake the opposite happens.

[overdog2]

The Sudarium of Oviedo:
www.shroud.com/guscin.htm

Is the matching facecloth John describes in his account of the crucifixion. Its known to have been in existence since around 1200AD. The blood stains on the face cloth match up with the Shroud.

Note the article references the 1988 (flawed) carbon test where the swatch taken for testing came from a corner repaired from the fire that almost destroyed the Shroud in the 1500’s.

Not everyone knows about the “botched” carbon testing because naturally “fake news” ignores any news that conflicts with their story line.

The only question I would have for the authors of this piece is who funded the “study”. Obviously they started off with an agenda (since they ignore other streams of evidence) and wrote the article with the purpose of calling it a fake.

[Salvavida]

It’s almost like the Lord himself knew there would be idiots prone to focusing on meaningless idols rather than on Him and His Word.

[Bob434]

[[The nanoparticles uncovered were found to not be typical of the blood of a healthy person.]]

How about a Healthy God/Man?

[ducttape45]

It’s a fake, get over it.

[Missouri gal]

1) The radiocarbon dating was debunked by the principal author of the original radiocarbon study when he discovered the rc samples were dyed cotton, not linen. This was explained as a “reweave patch” placed by Marguerite de Charnay in mid thirteenth century. RC dating cannot be repeated because they then coated the shroud with an organic preservative.
2) The blood and internal fluids leaked onto the head wrapping, and stains match the head wrapping (Sudarium of Oviedo, kept in Spain for centuries) in shape and content.

3) Very obvious that the blood flow alternates consistent with alternating position of a crucifixion victim. The victim actually was standing on the nail in the feet.

4) Impossible for anybody in 13th century to know to mix lung fluid with blood from the mouth.

No way does this alleged study meet the “smell test.”

[bkopto]

The bloodstains did not match up with any pose, however, with the evidence suggesting that a standing model was used to imprint the patterns for the hands, the chest, and the back. "This is just not what happens to a person on a cross," Borrini said, noting that the comparison model displayed very different blood angle patterns than the shroud.

I don't see any insurmountable problems here. So the body was wrapped up after being removed from the cross, and was wrapped up by moving the corpse around, causing oozing blood to flow in different directions. Also, the wrapped corpse would likely be moved into various positions when transporting it to its burial place, also causing variable oozing directions. Why would this be hard to understand? These variable corpse positions would explain the observations.

[Ancesthntr]

Priest also told BuzzFeed that the amount of blood from the wrists on the shroud would “more than likely” have needed the heart to have been beating at the time the bloodflow formed, however.

“The fact that flowing bloodstains exist at all on a deceased body that was reportedly cleaned also raises questions,” he added.

---

That is just scientific fact. Also, someone who died from crucifixtion would have been very dehydrated, which impedes blood-flow - and would mean that once the heart stopped beating, the congealing of the blood would occur that much more quickly (vs., say, a person who was well-hydrated who dropped dead of a heart attack). Add to that the fact that in the Jewish religion, a dead body is washed - well - prior to being clothed in linens (plural - not one). There would likely have been little or no blood on the burial cloths (again, PLURAL).

BTW, a reading of the appropriate passages in the Christian Bible indicates that there were cloths (PLURAL) found in the tomb.

I don’t understand why there is such emphasis by some regarding the genuineness of the Shroud of Turin. It would seem to me that you either believe that Jesus was who the Christian Bible says he was, or you don’t - and that depending upon a piece of cloth and its markings for one’s faith is rather silly. Of course, I’m Jewish and don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus, but that is wholly apart from the science, and also wholly apart from matters of faith.

[the OlLine Rebel]

OK, I haven’t read all of this yet.

But I have to wonder if they are checking ALL the blood all over it? Or just “traces” - which implies one can hardly see it with the naked eye.

Anyway, I never worry too much about this shroud. It could be Jesus, but who’s to say it isn’t just another punished victim from that time period and area? The shroud didn’t seem to be known until much later, so it’s still possible it was just a curiosity kept for generations out of interest in criminal punishment and how images could be made. Then someone surmised it was Jesus and it went from there.

The problem with research on this is they are assuming just 2 possibilities: Jesus, or some later creative forgery. That’s a poor premise.