Posted on 09/24/2005 3:55:47 PM PDT by NYer
p>World-renowned Los Angeles liturgical artist Isabel Piczek earned accolades for "opening new doors of research" at the Dallas International Shroud of Turin Conference held at the Adolphus Hotel Sept. 8-11. The landmark event drew 160 scientists, artists and physicians from around the world sharing the latest research on the shroud, believed by many to portray a full-length image of the crucified Christ.
Using a statue she created as a visual aid measuring one-third the actual size of the man depicted on the shroud, Piczek presented her explanation of the image's "Concealed Bas-Relief Effect." She theorizes the image of the shroud was transported onto a straight and taut linen above and below the man's hovering body.
"One of the puzzling mysteries of the shroud is that the image transported to an absolutely straight, taut surface is not flat. It is semi-three-dimensional, very much the same as a bas-relief is in art," explained Piczek. "In art, the bas-relief image always curves out of a straight background that radically eliminates the rest of the space behind the bas-relief."
Refuting theories that the figure on the shroud was painted, Piczek declared that the image's strong foreshortening of the body, combined with the lack of a continuous paint medium film on the cloth's surface, are "decisive arguments" that the shroud is not a painting. According to Piczek, the foreshortening of the legs, reflecting the reclined figure's elevated knees, excludes the possibility of a contact image of any kind. "An unknown system obeying laws different from optics created the image with strangely similar visual results," declared Piczek.
She came to this theory "at the cost of my whole brain" only one month ago during the creation of the shroud statue. "A heretofore unknown interface acted as an event horizon," explained Piczek. "The straight, taut linen of the shroud simply was forced to parallel the shape of this powerful interface. The projection, an action at a distance, happens from the surface and limit of this, taking with itself the bas-relief image of the upper and, separately, the underside of the body."
Piczek, who holds degrees in art and particle physics, thinks this new theory of how the image appeared warrants greater investigation of the non-image area of the shroud. Such research could yield scientific clues to the "unknown information field" which caused the projection, according to the shroud expert. A devout Catholic as well as a theoretical physicist, Piczek believes the image occurred at the moment of Christ's resurrection.
"The image of the shroud and its riddle cannot be solved through the science of the past," said Piczek. Concurring with French physicist and shroud researcher, Dr. William Wolkowski, Piczek believes that transdisciplinary study of the shroud will give birth to a new scientific age. "The shroud shows the future of science," declared Piczek.
She called the conference a "landmark event" due to the presence of Turin officials who fielded questions about the shroud, last displayed in public in 2000. Msgr. Giuseppe Ghiberti, adviser and spokesman for the papal custodian of the shroud in Turin, Italy, led the Turin delegation and delivered the keynote address.
According to Piczek, the Turin officials dispelled rumors about the shroud, including whether or not the shroud has been vacuumed. "The old thought that the shroud has been vacuumed is not true. The dirt on the cloth is historic," said Piczek, a founding board member of the Dallas-based American Shroud of Turin Association for Research. AMSTAR co-sponsored the event along with CENTRO, a 400-year-old shroud organization based in Turin, and the 50-year-old Holy Shroud Guild based in Esopus, New York.
During the conference, botany expert, Dr. Alan Whanger, indicated that pollen and flowers on the shroud reveal plants native to Jerusalem at the time of Jesus. Other conference presenters discussed their analysis of the shroud's human bloodstains as well as biblical references to the shroud and an explanation of the cloth's "lost years" before it resurfaced in France in the 13th century.
Next year, an international shroud conference will be held in Los Angeles. Dr. August Accetta, founder of The Southern California Shroud Center in Huntington Beach will be among the local organizers for the 2006 event. (For further information on shroud events, log on to www.shroud.com.)
Shroud ping!
Not meaning to be sacriligious...but have they ever taken a DNA sample from the Shroud?
How nice to find a image of a 1st century rabbi on a shroud that dates to 12th Century (the great age of religious fakes).
I am sure I will base my faith on that. Yeppers!
This is one of those threads, posted as news, that will lead to charges of religion bashing toward anyone who offers a criticism.
"They" meaning officials of the Catholic church, or maybe the family who actually own the Shroud?
"Not meaning to be sacriligious...but have they ever taken a DNA sample from the Shroud?"
That is a good question. I believe when they were last allowed to examine it was before PCR technology was practical. IF it is blood stains or other bodily fluids on the shroud, it should be possible to extract them and get DNA fragments. Of course, I'm not sure what that would tell us. Possibly, the ethnic makeup of the person?
Anybody.
That is a good question. I believe when they were last allowed to examine it was before PCR technology was practical. IF it is blood stains or other bodily fluids on the shroud, it should be possible to extract them and get DNA fragments. Of course, I'm not sure what that would tell us. Possibly, the ethnic makeup of the person?
Who knows? If something were to be found from Mary...then comparisons could be made. And then parsing out the mother from the Father...you might have a look at the genetics of God (or God making his Son human).
It just seems to me like that would be fascinating.
The owners haven't taken anything in more than a century, but that doesn't mean they don't have a stash somewhere else.
[She came to this theory "at the cost of my whole brain"...]
I don't know why, but I think that is very funny.
Well......the atheists found the thread, already.
Clone Jesus!
Whether the shroud is a fake or not (I don't have a formed opinion on the topic), your post appears not to account for this:
During the conference, botany expert, Dr. Alan Whanger, indicated that pollen and flowers on the shroud reveal plants native to Jerusalem at the time of Jesus.
Somehow, I doubt that 12th Century Europeans are so clever as to have manipulated the pollen in the fabric to consist of plants from the Middle East.
"I'm not sure what that would tell us. Possibly, the ethnic makeup of the person?"
Mitochrondia DNA should be revealing now that I think of it. Also, in that, as I and other Christians belive, the Lord Jesus had no earthy father, I would like to see what his Y chromosome looks like. Should it not be unique?
He could not have gotten it from Mary. It had to be totally miracuous in nature and specially created by God for the conception. Would it be like the original man, Adam? Would it be like Abraham, the father of the Jews? Or, would it be like King David? If the shroud is genuine, then a DNA study of the Y chromosome would be extremely interesting. Of course, to those that don't believe it would make no difference.
This "rabbi" of which you speak Is the Son of God
But, seriously...it is a question to be asked. If the DNA would show Mary and Joseph...what would we think? If the DNA shows Mary and someone else...what would we think? What if the DNA matched nothing known to humankind? Would that have made Jesus human? What would that do to our basis in faith?
Or, are we meant not to know?
you should be a little more up to date on your research.
I suppose one would have to live overseas to understand the true meaning of "The Ugly American".
This board - and others - epitomize why the rest of the world dislikes Americans. All you can do is hurl infantile and ignorant insults towards everybody's religious or cultural beliefs just because they don't fit into your narrow views of reality.
This is NOT just to you, mr meager --- there are a few other commentators in this string that it is directed towards.
I suggest that you read - THINK - then discuss merits or demerits of an article, religion or custom as you see them.
Then someone may actually care about your opinion instead of thinking which grade school you are currently enrolled in.
mr meager = Freudian slip? *smile* BTW...thanks for your rant.
As for the rest, I don't know. It's called "faith". Each person has free will and will act according to their own beliefs.
The Pope now owns the shroud. The last king of Italy, the deposed Umberto II, willed it to JP2 when he died in '79.
. What uncbob said plus this: Most of us here in the US could give a f**k less what people in othere coutnries think of us.
Now to summarize your rant. You start a rant that says how we insult people and you insult all americans. What does that say about you? You are no better than the ones you are ranting about. Get a clue. If you want an honest discussion ignore the a**holes and respond, intelligently, to the ones who enter into the discussion.
Oh, yes, the people who think of us as "ugly Americans" are the first to call when they need their chestnuts pulled out of the fire. We are not so ugly then right?
Right on and a day will come when every knee will bow and every tongue will confess that Jesus is Lord.
.
Praise GOD that...
LOVE is the only reality and that...
GOD is LOVE.
.
The Shroud is either exactly what it is supposed to be, or it is a taunt by God to show how puny man's science is. The Shroud has defied every attempt by the most sophisticated scientists to prove it fraudulent (and they have tried very hard.)
If you are sincere go to the site that is linked on post 1. This site will show you why what you posted is wrong. It is a very interesting site.
That date was taken from a sample that turned out to be a patch added in the Middle Ages, bud.
bookmark
Bravo! You are absolutely correct.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
IIRC, in one tale, the "UA" discovered that the reason that all old women in one village had permanently, painfully bent backs was because they spent their lifetime sweeping the village street in front of their homes -- with short-handled brooms. Seems the brooms had short bamboo handles, because the bamboo variety in that valley was short and stunted.
So he showed the villagers how to get long bamboo from the next valley -- and so saved the backs of future generations of village women.
Physically "ugly"; personally beautiful...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you!
One of my best friends was on the early team. He does a presentation on the Shroud. One of the points he makes is that even if they were able to get DNA they have no other forensic evidence to compare it with - there is no DNA to match it with, we have no idea what the height, weight, or blood type of Jesus is...DNA has to be compared with other DNA. But there is nothing to compare it with.
Yeah, and I was actually reading with my whole brain, in spite of having my kid talking about fictional goat names while I read it, and I finally asked myself, "What is the usual reason I don't understand something?" It's not the background chatter, and it's not my IQ...ooh! I remember! it's when I'm reading pure mahaha!
Now, if I'm wrong and this woman is not speaking Obscurese to camouflage her underlying fraud, I trust shroudie and/or swordmaker will tell me sooner or later. I have no trouble reading them; their own scrupulousness and clarity recommend them.
(Full disclosure: I think the shroud is probably the real deal, and the burden is now on the skeptics.)
As Archie used to say: "Aw jeez...!"
Yes. But the DNA is far too degraded and contaminated with the DNA or others from centuries of exposure and handlng to give any meaningful information.
The Shroud scares the anti-Christians because of the message it conveys.
Guess you didn't hear about the Carbon 14 test.... Dates to the 12th century.
Actually, the 1989 C14 dating reported an average of four samples of ~1350 AD, or 14th century, not 12th, Donald.
However, the 1989 Carbon Dating has been conclusively proved to have been made on a sample that included a patch that added between 40%-60% 16th Century threads that were rewoven in to repair the shroud.
The newer threads are not exemplar of the Shroud itself.
Photo-micrographs of the 1989 sample have been examined (something that SHOULD have been done in 1989) and the bifurcation between the original and replacement threads is quite clear). The newer threads are chemically and physically different (again, breaking the agreed protocols, the samples were not chemically tested in 1989!). By every test, the newer threads are not exemplar of the main body of the shroud.
- They have a twist opposite that of the shroud (S instead of Z),- They are slightly thinner than the main body of the shroud,
- Are more consistent in their thickness, indicating machine spinning rather than hand spinning,
- have a differing fullering method,
- are dyed to match the aged color of the shroud itself.
- a differing bleaching method,
- The newer threads have fibers of cotton twisted into the thread... something not found on the rest of the shroud.
The reweaving of the new into the old occured on a diagonal running from top left to bottom right of the master sample. From this master sample five sub-samples were cut across the sample, leaving every sample with some new and some original material. The sample that tested the youngest (c. 1390 AD, +/-25 years) had approximately 60% rewoven (16th Century) material. The sample that tested oldest (c. 1260 AD, +/- 25 years) had only about 40% rewoven material. The tested ages of the other two samples (one on either side of a sample piece that was retained and later examined by Chemist Dr. Ray Rogers, who found the reweaving) provided test dates proportionate to the percentage of "new" material.
None of the tested dates fell within the degree of confidence of any of the other test dates. This should have been a red flag when identical tests on a sample supposedly made of contiguous material of the same age results in such varied dates. The expected results were that the reported dates would all fall within a 50 year degree of confidence window... not 180 years.
When asked what age the original threads would have to be, when mixed with 16th century patch threads, to give the varying test dates (which spread by 130 years, far outside the expected degree of confidence of plus or minus 25 years) from the four (of five) sample pieces, no less a personage than Harry Gove, inventor of the C14 test used, stated, after doing some calculations, that they would have to be First Century, plus or minus 100 years!
One last problem... there are in existence medals of known provenance, struck in the 11th Century (1001 - 1100 AD), that show the shroud with its image... in other words, someone copied the image on the shroud at least 145 years before the oldest possible C14 date (1235 AD - 1260 AD minus the extreme range of confidence of 25 years).
If he was the Son of a living G-d, then that living G-d would could tell us directly, rather than playing hide and seek with 12 century tapestry pictures.
"That date was taken from a sample that turned out to be a patch added in the Middle Ages, bud."
That was the excuse when the patch came back 12th century. If they knew before hand that it was a patch, then why provide that to date it? Oh, it was such a good patch that they couldn't distinguish the patch from the original? Why not take a new sample and then date it? Well, we don't want to do that because it is "too holy?"
Science knows everything, doesn't it. Scepticism about the Shroud, about Creation, about grandmother's age old wise advice, but none ever about the Holy Rational Science of Man. Fools rush in...
I doubt a new sample will be taken now that the shroud has been placed in an anti-aging casing.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/c14dats.htm
Good reading. Not only is there carbon 14 dating, but also potassium and argon dating that extends the ability to date material from non-organic samples.
Now if you start off with the idea that Moses wrote Genesis, and it is historical fact, I can't help you there.
I don't know. You tell me. How, may I ask, could they use DNA to relate Jesus to Mary if they have no DNA on Mary?
Are there are black holes in the Shroud of Turin?
Ping
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
