Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Science Stunned by Virgin of Guadalupe´s Eyes
Zenit News Org ^ | January 14, 2001 | Zenith News Org

Posted on 10/16/2001 10:09:15 PM PDT by topher

Engineer Sees a Reflection, Literally, From a Scene in 1531

ROME, JAN. 14, 2001 ( .- Digital technology is giving new leads in understanding a phenomenon that continues to puzzle science: the mysterious eyes of the image of Virgin of Guadalupe.

The image, imprinted on the tilma of a 16th-century peasant, led millions of indigenous Indians in Mexico to convert to the Catholic faith. Last week in Rome, results of research into the famed image were discussed by engineer José Aste Tonsmann of the Mexican Center of Guadalupan Studies during a conference at the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum.

For over 20 years, this graduate of environmental systems engineering of Cornell University has studied the image of the Virgin left on the rough maguey fiber fabric of Juan Diego’s tilma. What intrigued Tonsmann the most were the eyes of the Virgin.

Though the dimensions are microscopic, the iris and the pupils of the image’s eyes have imprinted on them a highly detailed picture of at least 13 people, Tonsmann said. The same people are present in both the left and right eyes, in different proportions, as would happen when human eyes reflect the objects before them.

Tonsmann says he believes the reflection transmitted by the eyes of the Virgin of Guadalupe is the scene on Dec. 9, 1531, during which Juan Diego showed his tilma, with the image, to Bishop Juan de Zumárraga and others present in the room.

In his research, Tonsmann used a digital process used by satellites and space probes in transmitting visual information.

He insists that the image "that has not been painted by human hand." As early as the 18th century, scientists showed that it was impossible to paint such an image in a fabric of that texture. The "ayate" fibers used by the Indians, in fact, deteriorated after 20 years. Yet, the image and the fabric it is imprinted on have lasted almost 470 years ago.

Tonsmann pointed out that Richard Kuhn, a Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, has found that the image did not have natural, animal or mineral colorings. Given that there were no synthetic colorings in 1531, the image is inexplicable.

In 1979, Americans Philip Callahan and Jody B. Smith studied the image with infrared rays and discovered to their surprise that there was no trace of paint and that the fabric had not been treated with any kind of technique.

"[How] it is possible to explain this image and its consistency in time without colors, on a fabric that has not been treated?" Tonsmann asked. "[How] is it possible that, despite the fact there is no paint, the colors maintain their luminosity and brilliance?"

Tonsmann, a Peruvian engineer, added, "Callahan and Smith showed how the image changes in color slightly according to the angle of viewing, a phenomenon that is known by the word iridescence, a technique that cannot be reproduced with human hands."

The scientist began his study in 1979. He magnified the iris of the Virgin’s eyes 2,500 times and, through mathematical and optical procedures, was able to identify all the people imprinted in the eyes.

The eyes reflect the witnesses of the Guadalupan miracle, the moment Juan Diego unfurled his tilma before the bishop, according to Tonsmann. In other words, the Virgin’s eyes have the reflection that would have been imprinted in the eyes of any person in her position.

In the eyes, Tonsmann believes, it is possible to discern a seated Indian, who is looking up to the heavens; the profile of a balding, elderly man with a white beard, much like the portrait of Bishop Zumárraga, painted by Miguel Cabrera, to depict the miracle; and a younger man, in all probability interpreter Juan González.

Also present, Tonsmann believes, is an Indian, likely Juan Diego, of striking features, with a beard and mustache, who unfolds his own tilma before the bishop; a woman of dark complexion, possibly a Negro slave who was in the bishop’s service; and a man with Spanish features who looks on pensively, stroking his beard with his hand.

In a word, the Virgin’s eyes bear a kind of instant picture of what occurred at the moment the image was unveiled in front of the bishop, Tonsmann says.

Moreover, in the center of the pupils, on a much more reduced scale, another scene can be perceived, independent of the first, the scientist contends. It is that of an Indian family made up of a woman, a man and several children. In the right eye, other people who are standing appear behind the woman.

Tonsmann ventured to express why he believes the Virgin’s eyes have a "hidden" message for modern times, when technology is able to discover it. "This could be the case of the picture of the family in the center of the Virgin’s eye," he says, "at a time when the family is under serious attack in our modern world."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last
To: RobbyS
Then I could be wrong on that point. I assumed it was named after Juan Diego, since he is revered as being a part of this story.
21 posted on 10/16/2001 10:56:51 PM PDT by topher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: mercy; Arthur McGowan
Oh come on you two, don't beat around the bush. Have the balls to say it outright: You hate Catholics.
22 posted on 10/16/2001 10:59:22 PM PDT by Timesink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ppaul
The photo in the book is enlargements of the pupil from the 1960s testing. Modern testing could find "infinite images" in the eyes (assuming that this is a miraculous image).

By "infinite images", I mean that images can be expanded as infinited as our "primitive science" allows (compared to what heaven can do, science is limited and lacks understanding, especially of such special images).

23 posted on 10/16/2001 10:59:49 PM PDT by topher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: topher
It is also worth noting that the events described in the original post were a major turning point in the development of Mexico as a Catholic nation. Until 1531, Mexico was clearly divided into classes of wealthy Catholic Spaniards and the poor Indians who were often exploited by the ruling class. The fact that Our Lady of Guadalupe appeared to a poor Indian instead of a wealthy Spaniard caused some monumental soul-searching among the people in the upper class, and the lives of the Mexicans of Indian descent improved almost immediately.
24 posted on 10/16/2001 10:59:57 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
You need a reputation as a smart ass like myself before you can make sarcastic comments without adding the "slash sarcasm" thingy.

You've gotten flamed by some here - expect more before you do damage control ;)

25 posted on 10/16/2001 11:03:34 PM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Arthur McGowan
I gave you a long form of my response to you.

I consider Mary to be my mother -- Jesus gave her to me on the cross ("Woman this is your son, and son this is your mother"). Anyone who is a member of her Son's church is one of her children, who she can defend -- not because she is divine, but the favor she has with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus (all three persons of the Trinity). Show me a person in the Bible who an angel appears to and says "Hail to you, you are full of grace". And then the response of Mary that though she is the "Handmaid of the Lord", that "God has done great things for me".

God gives her angels and favors because of her position in heaven. Remember, the mother of the sons of Thunder, James and John, asked Jesus that they be allowed to sit at the right and left of Jesus in Heaven. Jesus responded that He does not have authority to say who will sit at His right or left hand -- only the Father can say that.

This clearly implies THAT THERE ARE POWERFUL POSITIONS in heaven. And by other scripture, it can be proven that Mary is very powerful not only when she was of this world but was to be very powerful in heaven.

That does not make her divine, but makes a person of heaven who the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit may grant favors for those on earth.

She is my mother as much as my other mother.

26 posted on 10/16/2001 11:06:54 PM PDT by topher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
The Jewish tradition is the black ribbon or band around her waste (her womb). You have to find a Biblical expert to contradict me on that one, as I got it from reading several books on Guadalupe and that this was where the black "belt" (for lack of a better word) meant -- she is pregnant, and has special honor in Jewish society of the time of Christ.

This is why Jesus NEVER SPOKE OF ABORTION. Having children was always valued in Jewish tradition. Rachel lamenting how barren she is, for example. And the rejoicing at the birth of children in the Old Testament.

Father Mitch Pacwa would be a good source if I could pull some favors with some Jesuits who know him.

27 posted on 10/16/2001 11:11:03 PM PDT by topher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mercy
re your post 11.

Disgraceful. I have read some of your replys on other threads. Obviously, they have not made a very big impression on me as I don't recall which threads and what your positions were. However, with this comment of yours...well, suffice it to say that I am not impressed and hold your judgement in very low regard as most who view it do as well, IMHO.

I think an apology is in order and I think you should present it without delay.

28 posted on 10/16/2001 11:11:05 PM PDT by griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: topher
Jesus said: "Do not give what is holy to the unworthy."

Jesus said: "Only a good tree can produce good fruit and a bad tree, bad fruit."

Do you have the Chapter and verses for these two statements?

29 posted on 10/16/2001 11:14:15 PM PDT by jude_3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: topher
I have often bashed Catholics due to their elevation of Mary. That being said, I am willing to look at the evidence. Are there pictures of the eyes that you can post?
30 posted on 10/16/2001 11:17:05 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer
The eyes! A photo of the eyes! Who has one they can post so we can see these images?
31 posted on 10/16/2001 11:18:30 PM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: topher
The eyes! The eyes! Pics of the eyes! Please!
32 posted on 10/16/2001 11:23:26 PM PDT by ppaul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Senator Pardek
You need a reputation as a smart ass like myself

You're a nutcase. I have reams of files and notes to prove it.

33 posted on 10/16/2001 11:23:40 PM PDT by Storm Orphan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Storm Orphan
Don't talk to me of "reaming" - you libertine pervert.
34 posted on 10/16/2001 11:26:43 PM PDT by Senator Pardek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
A bump for reading later
35 posted on 10/16/2001 11:27:27 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Storm Orphan; Senator Pardek
The Senator is esteemed in these parts.

Senator, use your Vulcan disruptor grip on him.

36 posted on 10/16/2001 11:28:28 PM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Senator Pardek
Right into my trap.

Now for the mind beam.

37 posted on 10/16/2001 11:28:31 PM PDT by Storm Orphan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: PRND21
If the tourist guy Jack N. Boxx is not seen in the picture of the Virgin of Guadalupe now, I'll bet he will be soon! Jack pops up everywhere.
38 posted on 10/16/2001 11:37:27 PM PDT by Dixielander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: PRND21

(and an "I didn't know about the Virgin of Guadalupe" bump)

39 posted on 10/16/2001 11:38:41 PM PDT by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: topher
What is the non-Catholic scientific community's conclusions about this picture and the images in the eyes? Something reported to be this markedly supernatural should attract interest from many faiths, as well as from agnostics.
40 posted on 10/16/2001 11:59:24 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-100 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson