Wrong yet again. Example: the face cloth is known as the Sudarium; it’s kept in a cathedral in Oviedo, Spain. Herringbone weave is definitely 1st century (and long prior to that, actually). No one has been able to duplicate it; not even close (the image).....but then why bother you with facts, right?
Tell ya what ya do: Barrie Schwortz has an excellent Web site (www.shroud.com). He’s had it up for 14 years now. Barrie was the lead documentary photographer for STURP (he’s also Jewish). Papers out the wazoo, links, etc. Go there and study; would keep you busy for days (although, of course, we both know you won’t).
Then....come talk to me. Ask legitimate questions; challenge the science. That is encouraged....but bring your A game. There has been some amazing work done on this cloth.
“...the face cloth is known as the Sudarium; it’s kept in a cathedral in Oviedo, Spain. “
And in The Innocents Abroad, Mark Twain noted that as he and his fellow travelers crossed Europe, “we find a piece of the true cross in every old church we go into, and some of the nails that held it together. I would not like to be positive, but I think we have seen as much as a keg of these nails.”
Twill weave? It wasn’t that twill couldn’t have existed before the Diasora, but that recently discovered 1st century burial shrouds from Jerusalem are simpler two-way weave - not the twill weave used on the Turin Shroud. Also, instead of being a single sheet like the famous item in Turin, those recently discovered are made up of several sections, with a (biblically-mentioned) separate piece for the head.
and gw, as for “blood decomposition products, traces of pollen matched by location and even germination time of year to species specific TO the outskirts of Jerusalem; studies on weaving of the fabric; studies on the anatomy of the body”... Who did the work, and when was it done? 30 years ago? Univacs doing the probability calculations, or were they using slide rules, like the SR-71 boys in the old Lockheed “Skunk Works”?
Look, y’all got Jesus’ shroud and True Cross splinters and saints’ shinbones, and the soldier’s side-piercing spear - you seem to me to be little more than pagans with mystic, magic charms and relics. If it’s Jesus’ shroud, I’m sure he’ll claim it back when he comes back, but, absent His call, I just ain’t buying what Turin’s selling.
It irritates the heck out of me when people spout off out of total ignorance in their unjustified faith in their own intelligence. They should take some time- preferably years - in researching the subject before expounding. (Myself, I am far from an expert. But I have been following The Shroud for 50 years, mainly, as I mentioned before, from the art angle.)
One that particularly irks me, again from the art side of the equation, is that it was obviously a Medieval forgery - and yet NO ONE has, with all our modern day expertise and science, been able to duplicate it, althoug one must give them A for effort - twisted and convoluted as they are..
The most inane it the “da Vinci did it”. I agree that daVinci was ahead of his time as to intelligence and talent, but, good grief, even if one wants to believe the flawed carbon dating for age, that still puts it hundreds of years before daVinci was born. I doubt even he was that talented. ;o)
There is NO excuse for these ignorant and arrogant refutations of the Shroud spouted out of thin air (the kind between two ears of some people) when research today is at our fingertips. Even a cursory, quick GOOGLE could enlighten them enough to a least question their knee-jerk suppositions, slowing them down long enough to maybe bestir themselves to further investigation before solidifying their less than expert judgment.
So thank you for responding to some of these irritating postings in such a succinct way. I have wanted to for years - but would not have been so diplomatic.
I have been following Barrie's site/work since he first went on line and corresponded for some time - he is most open and kind. He has done a herculean job and a great work...so valuable.