[Gamecock]

Ping

[markomalley]

“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...

[Pyro7480]

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."

[2banana]

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

[Seruzawa]

“”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.

[MNDude]

Wow! Those early church scientists really knew their stuff!

[Houghton M.]

“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.

[Hacklehead]

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

[Interesting Times]

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.

[agere_contra]

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.

[DieHard the Hunter]

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.

[wmfights]

Do we really need relics to support our faith?

[SkyPilot]

ping

[Doc Savage]

Calling Dan Rather! Calling Dan Rather!

[dartuser]

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.

[GeronL]

The shroud of Turin is not part of any Christian religion I know. Where is it mentioned in the bible?

[GeronL]

not that it proves anything. Funded by atheists? right, thats inmpartial science.

[Sloth]

Shroud of Tron

[Pan_Yan]

I'll throw my two cents in because it looks fun:

A person does not need physical objects to obtain or maintain their Christianity. But the God of today is the same as the God of the Israelites. He is the Pillar of Fire in the dessert. When the king of Babylon used the plates from God's temple for a feast God wrote his doom on a wall and took from him his empire. When the Ark of the Covenant was captured and placed before an idol the idol fell on it's face before the ark. Objects can be sacred. They are not vital for salvation. They should not be prayed to. When Jesus dies the curtain was torn asunder. There is no priesthood or barrier that separates us from the Holy of Holy. But God has not changed. An object touched by Jesus would surely be an article of faith. Until disproved it should in the least make men wonder, and remind them victory over death was won if not inside that specific shroud at least one like it.

[Julia H.]

If these people think debunking the shroud is going to weaken my faith in the Resurrection, they are horribly mistaken. I've never believed the shroud was the real thing, but it's still a beautiful piece of artwork, and a powerful reminder of events that really did happen. That said, all these so-called scientists have done is show it is possible to fake the shroud. As any scientist worth his salt should know, that is logical miles from proving the original shroud is definitely fake. Even if the shroud is fake, the burden is still on them to prove this was the exact method of forgery used. By their "logic," the fact that it is possible to make convincing counterfeit money means all money is counterfeit.