Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin
Yahoo ^ | 5 Oct 2009 | Philip Pullella

Posted on 10/05/2009 11:22:44 AM PDT by Gamecock

An Italian scientist says he has 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. 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. "We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud," 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.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Current Events; History; Religion & Culture; Religion & Science
KEYWORDS: anotherstudy; antichristian; antitheists; archeology; atheists; bravosierra; christianity; eyesofftheprize; ggg; godsgravesglyphs; heresy; idolatry; medievalfake; medievalforgery; medievalfraud; science; scientists; shroudofturin; superstition; turin; vainjanglings
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-592 next last

1 posted on 10/05/2009 11:22:44 AM PDT by Gamecock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: drstevej; OrthodoxPresbyterian; CCWoody; Wrigley; Gamecock; Jean Chauvin; jboot; AZhardliner; ...
Ping


2 posted on 10/05/2009 11:24:54 AM PDT by Gamecock ("...Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles" and both to Americans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

“Garlaschelli received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results. “

OK, sure. Whatever you say...


3 posted on 10/05/2009 11:25:07 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Those skeptics are frothed into a frenzy over this. I wonder if it will actually live up to expectations or not.

Oh, and you conveniently left out this part:

Garlaschelli received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results.

"Money has no odor," he said. "This was done scientifically. If the Church wants to fund me in the future, here I am."

4 posted on 10/05/2009 11:25:40 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

If true - using technology of today - 2000 years more advanced that what was available.


5 posted on 10/05/2009 11:27:51 AM PDT by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - they want to die for islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

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

That’s it? That’s the world shattering announcement? “We discovered that something could be faked, therefore that proves that it was faked?” Ummmm, yeah right. I’ll bet this scientist also believes that of event B happened after event A then event A must have cuased event B.


6 posted on 10/05/2009 11:28:49 AM PDT by Seruzawa (If you agree with the French raise your hand - If you are French raise both hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

“Money has no odor,”...

But this “study” does...


7 posted on 10/05/2009 11:30:07 AM PDT by jessduntno (Tell Obama to STFU - Stop The Federal Usurpation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2banana

“If true - using technology of today - 2000 years more advanced that what was available.”

Am I the only one who reads the article:

“Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages.”

“They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A mask was used for the face. The pigment was then artificially 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.”


8 posted on 10/05/2009 11:31:12 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Wow! Those early church scientists really knew their stuff!


9 posted on 10/05/2009 11:31:44 AM PDT by MNDude (The Republican Congress Economy--1995-2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seruzawa

The carbon date shows this is from late 1200s.

It’s been pretty well debunked as legit.

(And yes, I am a Christian. I just happen to think this artifact is a fake.)


10 posted on 10/05/2009 11:32:54 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

“that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud”

Weasel words. It’s made of cloth rather than rice-paper? Same characteristics?

How many “characteristics” does it have to share with the Shroud before it shows it could have been manufactered long after the fact? Will it need to have the “characteristics” of the pollen from the Jerusalem area that only blooms in the spring?

This is a “village idiot” planted story, so, of course, the media eat it up.


11 posted on 10/05/2009 11:33:22 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNDude

More like late 1200s con-men who rooked honest Churchmen.


12 posted on 10/05/2009 11:33:45 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Interesting that no pics accompanied the article. I wonder if the new shroud has Obama’s face.


13 posted on 10/05/2009 11:33:45 AM PDT by Hacklehead (Liberalism is the art of taking what works, breaking it, and then blaming conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
An Italian scientist says he has 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.

Whatever he may have produced, his willingness to make such a statement defines him as something other than a scientist.

14 posted on 10/05/2009 11:34:04 AM PDT by Interesting Times (For the truth about "swift boating" see ToSetTheRecordStraight.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ's burial cloth is a medieval fake.

How on earth could it do that?

If I convincingly fake a dollar bill, how does it prove that the one in your pocket is also a fake?

Carbon-date some Shroud threads NOT taken from the 13th century patch and see what the age is. That's science. But pretending that a fake proves that something else is a fake is just lunacy - or rather, it's the dishonest advancement of an atheist agenda.

Also: if the Shroud image is caused by a natural process to do with, I don't know, ammonia, heat, blood, aloes, whatever then reproducing the effect hardly falsifies the Shroud. Rather, it tends to validate it.

15 posted on 10/05/2009 11:34:17 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

“left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud.”

Operative word: “similar.”


16 posted on 10/05/2009 11:34:36 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

How has this “scientist’s” claim been subjected to peer review or independent falsification?


17 posted on 10/05/2009 11:35:47 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

It’s proof of concept that the shroud could have been faked.

I could do the same thing with cloth, lemon juice, and a candle.

Very mysterious.


18 posted on 10/05/2009 11:35:48 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

I’m unclear how this experiment proved or disproved anything with the Shroud of Turin. Anything that has ever happened in the natural world can, under the right circumstances, happen again in a similar fashion. This is true of the chocolate chip cookies my wife baked yesterday, and it is true of the Shroud of Turin too.


19 posted on 10/05/2009 11:36:12 AM PDT by DieHard the Hunter (Is mise an ceann-cinnidh. Cha ghéill mi do dhuine. Fàg am bealach.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Houghton M.

“left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud.”

Operative word: “similar.”

A pig is similar to a human if one is comparing both human and pig to a shovel.

A man is similar to a woman if comparing both to a pig.

Two brothers are similar to each other if comparing both to their great-grand-dad.

Similar is such a lovely word.


20 posted on 10/05/2009 11:36:22 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

Wow...do you think you are Jesus??


21 posted on 10/05/2009 11:37:29 AM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Interesting Times

“Whatever he may have produced, his willingness to make such a statement defines him as something other than a scientist.”

Correct.

It merely shows that a fake was possible with technology of the time.


22 posted on 10/05/2009 11:37:36 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock
Do we really need relics to support our faith?
23 posted on 10/05/2009 11:37:40 AM PDT by wmfights (If you want change support SenateConservatives.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seruzawa
Also note the headline; "Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin."

Then check out the first line of the story; "An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin,.....".

The headline is a bald statement of fact. The story reveals that it is actually a claim made by a man funded by an organization which has a vested interest in a certain experimental outcome.

I believe this is called a "conflict of interest".

24 posted on 10/05/2009 11:39:09 AM PDT by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

There are some that are saying that they tested part of the Shroud where a patch was placed later, therefore skewing the results.


25 posted on 10/05/2009 11:39:15 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy

“Wow...do you think you are Jesus??”

No Jesus is the Lord, son of the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob.

I am merely a man whose faith does not rely on things as potentially false as this cloth.


26 posted on 10/05/2009 11:39:46 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
Am I the only one who reads the article:

Most probably. There are a whole lot of people who assume they know what an article says and make their comments accordingly.

I used to believe that my fellow conservatives were thoughtful, rational, serious minded people...spending time on FR has thoroughly disabused me of that belief.

Buckley, Goldwater, Reagan conservatives seem to be in short supply these days.
27 posted on 10/05/2009 11:40:01 AM PDT by Sudetenland (Slow to anger but terrible in vengence...such is the character of the American people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

Wow, you are completely out of touch with the legitimate doubts raised by the last carbon dating. I suggest you read up on things you are expressing opinions on.

Look again at your statement, “It’s pretty well debunked as legit.” Pretty well debunked? That’s an educated statement?


28 posted on 10/05/2009 11:40:39 AM PDT by Nabber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
It’s been pretty well debunked as legit.

I recommend that you look up the "Sudarium of Olviedo". This is the facecloth that went with the Shroud. Its provenance is well-attested to at least as far back as the 6th Century and the thorn/blood marks on it match those on the shroud in dozens of places.

CSI Jerusalem would call that a match :0), but there is always the option of checking the carbon date of threads not taken from the 13th century patch.

This creation of a fake reeks of dishonest polemic - and at the same time should inform you that the carbon dating evidence is not settled.

29 posted on 10/05/2009 11:41:09 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

“There are some that are saying that they tested part of the Shroud where a patch was placed later, therefore skewing the results.”

I saw that on this thread. That’s news to me.

Lots of peoples’ faith is very weak to be worried about whether this cloth is real or not.


30 posted on 10/05/2009 11:41:35 AM PDT by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

ping


31 posted on 10/05/2009 11:41:43 AM PDT by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

“A mask was used for the face.”

I see. So they “reproduced” the Shroud but just left out a little detail.

The Face. One of the most significant things about the Shroud is the way the image reproduces a human body with “3-D” modeling. A cloth draped over a pigment-covered cadaver won’t produce a properly 3-D set of highlights and valleys. The face is one of the crucial areas for assessing this modeling.

They just left it out. To keep the paint and acid out of the volunteer’s eyes? The scientists are compassionate folks. I suppose they’d not have gotten many volunteers if they had asked for someone to volunteer to be crucified.


32 posted on 10/05/2009 11:42:14 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

Who said that their faith depends on this cloth?

What you don’t seem to understand is that you can have perfect belief that Christ was resurrected, and also believe that evidence of it was left behind. There is no problem here for the Believer.


33 posted on 10/05/2009 11:43:00 AM PDT by Nabber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
Do we really need relics to support our faith?

Whatever the answer to that question, there is no reason not to examine the truth/falsehood of the Shroud. The truth cannot lead us away from Christ.

34 posted on 10/05/2009 11:44:03 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

They could read it a thousand times. If they don’t wish to see it, they won’t.
BTW they won’t see your reply, either.


35 posted on 10/05/2009 11:44:08 AM PDT by cydcharisse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
The carbon date shows this is from late 1200s. It’s been pretty well debunked as legit.

The Shroudies will correct this soon, methinks, but it's not been debunked. The C14-tested patch was conclusively demonstrated recently to contain medieval "repair" fibers rewoven into the original cloth. A new C-14 analysis has to be done that does not contain these "repair" fibers.

Also, there are some historical references that may well refer to the Shroud that predate the late Middle Ages C-14 estimate. One is the depiction in the Hungarian Pray manuscript which even reproduces the odd l-shaped burn holes in the cloth. What the Shroud may be is the Holy Mandylion of Edessa, which, in some references, is called a full-length body portrait "folded in four" as opposed to just a facial icon. Ian Wilson has done some fascinating studies historically...it would be worth checking out if you are interested in the topic.

Anyway, as you intimated, Christianity doesn't stand or fall on this particular artifact, but it is an interesting study for sure.

36 posted on 10/05/2009 11:44:09 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

HURRAY!!! YOU’RE HERE!!! Autumn brings you back to us! We MISSED you! All good wishes to you and Lady Gamecock and the kidlings.


37 posted on 10/05/2009 11:44:13 AM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg ("I don't think they want my respect; I think they want my submission." - Flemming Rose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
Lots of peoples’ faith is very weak to be worried about whether this cloth is real or not.

That's the wrong conclusion.

38 posted on 10/05/2009 11:44:21 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

To: TheThirdRuffian

The carbon dating was off...but I have forgot were I read it so I offer my opinion as my 2 cents!!!


40 posted on 10/05/2009 11:45:26 AM PDT by GregB (Attention Sarah Palin supporters!!it cost 1 dollar to read this.Please send your money to Sarah!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Calling Dan Rather! Calling Dan Rather!


41 posted on 10/05/2009 11:45:28 AM PDT by Doc Savage (SOBAMP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
Lots of peoples’ faith is very weak to be worried about whether this cloth is real or not.

A person's attachment to reality is very weak if they accept anything the media says about the Shroud without checking.

42 posted on 10/05/2009 11:47:07 AM PDT by agere_contra
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

“It’s been pretty well debunked as legit.”

Sorry, you have not read the evidence. The C-14 dating has been pretty thoroughly debunked—and by people with no dog in this fight.

You need to do a “bit” of reading before you pontificate. I don’t know of any historical artifact so thoroughly examined forensically with the resulting evidence pointing nearly without exception toward authenticity. I write as a professional historian. If this were any other historical artifact, its authenticity would have been universally acknowledged decades ago. I see the bed Lincoln died in displayed in the Chicago Historical Museum and no one asks, “how do I know that’s authentic.” Thousands of historical artifacts are displayed around the world with 1/100th of the authenticating evidence that has arisen out of thousands of hours of scientific examination of the Shroud.

Yet people grasp at any straw, no matter how village-atheist produced, to discredit it. We would not be having this debate if it were a comparably researched relic of George Washington or Napoleon.


43 posted on 10/05/2009 11:47:15 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
"Do we really need relics to support our faith?"

Apparently a great many around here do.

Funny I thought the Ten Commandments expressly forbade idols. Seems there are a lot of Christians who depend on them to pin their faith on.

The Shroud of Turin is a fake. It has been demonstrated repeatedly both in dating and in the science required to make it. This simple fact has never weakened my faith...
44 posted on 10/05/2009 11:47:42 AM PDT by Sudetenland (Slow to anger but terrible in vengence...such is the character of the American people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian

Seems to me that your faith is somehow bothered by the potential that this cloth is what it purports to be....

And I can see no reason for that.


45 posted on 10/05/2009 11:47:50 AM PDT by Nabber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Gamecock

Only a skeptic would turn off his/her brain and accept this as evidence that the shroud is a fake. I don’t care one way or the other if its not genuine.

All they have done is show that it is reproducable. Just because the Mona-Lisa is reproducable doesn’t mean the original is a fake.

I swear ... you have to believe some real crazy stuff to be a non-believer.


46 posted on 10/05/2009 11:49:20 AM PDT by dartuser ("If you torture the data long enough, it will confess, even to crimes it did not commit")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland

“The Shroud of Turin is a fake. It has been demonstrated repeatedly both in dating and in the science required to make it.”

You are so wrong. You should do some more critical reading.

The shroud is not an idol, and it is not worshipped.


47 posted on 10/05/2009 11:49:32 AM PDT by Nabber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

No, and no one who claims the Shroud is the authentic burial shroud of Jesus says what you say. Shucks, half the scientists working on the scientific research on the Shroud are not even believers.

Christian faith does not depend on relics, but it does depend on the reality of a historical event (or chain of events).

But just as you cherish your great-grandmother’s china or your grandfather’s war medals, all humans everywhere through all time have cherished tangible objects that connect them to cherished persons of the past.

Is that so hard to fathom?


48 posted on 10/05/2009 11:50:20 AM PDT by Houghton M.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland
The Shroud of Turin is a fake. It has been demonstrated repeatedly both in dating and in the science required to make it.

Read the thread before you make such a claim.

49 posted on 10/05/2009 11:51:11 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: TheThirdRuffian
I've got no dog in this fight, since the authenticity of this particular artifact is not, and has never been, an article of faith. It's a little odd, though, that the researcher doesn't even advert to the significance of a perfectly accurate Carbon-14 test being performed on an unrepresentative sample: a medieval cotton patch which was added to a more-ancient linen cloth.

Surely he was aware of this?

For your further research convenience: http://tinyurl.com/turinlinen.

50 posted on 10/05/2009 11:51:29 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Point of information.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 551-592 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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