-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Miracle of the Shroud V - Blood and Limestone
- Thread starter MRC_Hans
- Start date
-
- Tags
- shroud of turin
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
Now Jabba says that:
1) He has evidence of authenticity
2) He is not going to show it to us unless we agree to accept it beforehand sight-unseen.
Belz...
Fiend God
You could be on holiday for half a century and nothing would change.
Jabba
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2012
- Messages
- 5,613
Agatha,
- Wouldn't you have to accept that each of these bits of information is a little bit of circumstantial evidence for blood -- just very weak circumstantial evidence?
Belz...
Fiend God
Pathetic.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
My Dear Mr. Savage:
You appear to have forgotten the "12 Strikes" post...
I remain sabermetrically yours, &ct.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
No.
I see you're back to begging instead of arguing. You have to earn credibility and agreement.
Self-published smears by an unqualified author is not evidence of any kind, circumstantial or otherwise. Speculation is not evidence of any kind, circumstantial or otherwise.
Evidence of blood, even if you had any that mattered, is not evidence of authenticity. You simply keep begging that question. You know it's a question you have to address, but as you've done countless times before with it, you defer establishing it until some undisclosed future date and tell us not to hold our breath.
I'll bet that horse is getting tired of looking at the cart.
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
That's the way to do it! Utterly abase yourself to get some kind of endorsement you can quote out of context later.
Maurice Ledifficile
Lost in translation
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,964
No, it is not. Even if it was (and it is not), how far are you going to go **** with "weak evidence", when the evidence for a medieval origin is so very solid?
How hard can it really be to say: "you now, I guess I was wrong. I don't have much of a case. But I believe in miracles and I'll keep my faith"?
Circumstantial evidence is not a thing. This is not a court of law.
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 8,266
No, it's just claims and assertions like she said.
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
Yes, a handful of irrelevant and false claims trump clear evidence of inauthenticity.
Put that on your dishonest blog and do a victory dance.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
In Jabbaland, "blood" is today's straw man for authenticity. "I have circumstantial evidence for blood," he says. He doesn't, for the reasons already given. But it wouldn't matter if he did. Since November (this time around) it's been pointed out to him that blood on the cloth has nothing to do with whether it's authentic. Jabba offers no more than his ipse dixit that it does. In his mad rush to trick someone into appearing to agree with him, he has left that "other question" for another time -- you know, the all-important question of how blood has anything to do with authenticity. Cart assertively before the horse.
Last edited:
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
It's not how far he goes, but where. After all these years he knows the answer his begging will produce. In fact he's counting on it. He's argued that the reason he can't prevail here is because his critics are ideologically entrenched. He lost the actual shroud debate a long time ago when he conceded his "defenses had been breached." Now it's about showing that they were breached only because his critics inappropriately refused to budge even a little on his behalf.
Actually he's already said as much, which leads me to ask (insofar as it's within the rules to do so) why he's still here. Fortunately for me he gives us plenty of information regarding that. It's not enough to maintain his faith in the face of criticism -- he has to show that the criticism is wrong.
No, I wouldn't accept that. I see claims and evidence-free assertions being made, I see an assertion that McCrone was hard to work with (as if that somehow undermines his findings) and I see a lot of question-begging.
In any case, circumstantial evidence is more suited to legal investigations rather than scientific enquiry, and even if the claims made in Mr Ford's paper had merit (which they don't) all his claims must be discarded as they do not have evidence, nor do they align with the mountain of direct evidence that we already have for the CIQ being a mediaeval artefact.
Jabba
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2012
- Messages
- 5,613
Sparrow,
- I'm pretty sure that there is a lot of evidence for the weave pattern existing by the first century. Though maybe not practiced in Palestine, it was (apparently) practiced in Syria.
- So far, I can't remember, or find, the source of that particular claim. But, I'll keep looking. Here's all I've found so far.
- From http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n60part5.pdf.
From the April 2004 newsletter
HERRINGBONE TWILL CLOTH
(AT LEAST 500 YEARS B.C.)
We announce in advance to the readers of «Sindone News» very important news that
will be published in «Sindon» by Mechthild Flury-Lemberg (excerpt).
It is very difficult to find, in ancient times, patterns that can be compared, for, to
what is found on the linen of the Holy Shroud, as far as the 1/3 herringbone twill weave
is concerned. So, as always happens in Shroud research, we have to accept signs,
inserting them scrupulously into the mosaic of knowledge already existing. A small
tessera of this mosaic is represented by the mountain leggings that have been recently
discovered, after the melting of a snowfield on the Vedretta of Ries in the Trentino Alto
Adige.
The finding in 1994 concerns something going back to the Iron Age and it is
dated between 795 and 499 B.C. The leggings are made of natural goat wool and
manufactured with a 2/2 herringbone weave (warp colour beige, weave colour brown
and dark brown). They have no soles and are 54.6 cm long and 15.7 cm wide. They are
made from a piece of fabric 31 cm wide, with selvage to the two ends, which are bound
by a seam on the inside.
An interesting link between the Shroud of Turin and the leggings is represented
by the mutual pattern of the herringbone. This is proof that we can find this technique of
weaving in ancient times, even though in the case of the leggings it is a very rough
woollen cloth. The woollen cloth was manufactured on a more primitive loom than the
Shroud of Turin, but the technique was already known in the pre-Christian era and is
not limited to a specific region. [/I]
- I'll be back.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
I am compelled to agree, and to add that they do not -- in their insinuated role -- increase even "a little bit" the probability of authenticity by way of supposedly decreasing the credibility of the medieval date. False dilemma, and all that.
Jabba wants to make this a matter of amount. If we don't agree that Ford is much proof or good proof, will we at least compromise and say that it's a little bit of proof and not very good proof? It's not a quantitative question; it's a qualitative question. Because we properly reject the false-dilemma premise upon which Jabba's calculus is based we qualitatively reject Jabba's argument.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
My Dear Mr. Savage:
Have you, perhaps, access to the original article by Mme. F-L in the 2004 Sidone? The "Newsletter" .pdf to which you link is so poorly formatted, it is difficult to tell what is being represented as Mme. F-L's own words, and what are being presented as interpretation.
I, for one, find it hard to believe a weaver, not to mention a textile expert, would compare a 2/2 herringbone with a 1/3 herringbone, as if the 1/3 were inescapably similar, and not an innovation.
I await your providence of a source, and,
Remain patiently yours, &ct.
Last edited:
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Really? All you can find is a 12-year-old press release summarizing a 22-year-old discovery?
And I conclude that since you've failed to address the latests criticisms regarding Ford's paper, you concede it is not what you claimed it was and your critics were right to reject it.
Ambiguous claims and unsupported generalizations. A 1/3 herringbone weave is not the same thing as a 2/2 herringbone weave. "Pre-Christian" and "not limited to a ... region" are straw men. They don't establish that a 1/3 herringbone weave of linen was available in Palestine in the 1st century. You need to prove that, not just employ the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
The bibliographic reference is
Flury-Lemberg, M. "Notiz zum Fischgratmuster auf dem Leinentuch." Sindon, no. 19-20 (2003), pp. 121-124.
The leggings were found in Northern Italy, nowhere near Palestine. Yet more references that Jabba employs as ammunition but clearly has not read.
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive , Co-Ordinator,, Russell's Antin
TY! I saw that...I was actually hoping for access to a copy of the article.
ETA: every sidonist citation of the article that I have been able to find indicates that it was not Mme. F-L who drew a "remarkable parallel" between the 2/2 herringbone and the 1/3 herringbone. I am shocked. Shocked, I say!
Last edited: