• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does the Shroud of Turin Show Expected Elongation of the Head in 2D?"

theprestige said:
You're kinda sounding like those crackpots who argue that because we have two different but similar estimates for the age of the universe, from two different methodologies, there's a chance the age of the universe could be nowhere near either of those estimates.
Click to expand...

No that analogy is nothing like what I am talking about.

Then there is the problem that if it was a medieval forgery, the artist got the position of the crucifixion spikes wrong.

I have not been able to find a medieval painting of the crucifixion with the nails through the wrist as on the shroud, all the ones I have seen have the nails through the palm of the hands.
 
Pacal said:
Well every effort was made to make absolutely sure that all the samples to be tested, except the control samples, were in fact from the Shroud of Turin. So just how were they not from the "same thing"? The fact that the dates don't overlap isn't even a fact. two of the dates Zurich and Tucson do overlap. one is 646 plus or minus 31 years i.e., 676-615 years. The other is 676 plus or minus 24 years i.e., 700-652 years. They overlap with 652-676 years. As for the Oxford results of 750 plus or minus 30 years. First they are not all that discordant with the other results. Secondly discordant or "strange" results from carbon 14 tests happen a lot which is why you don't just do one if at all possible. Especially for a item like this.

I will also point out that during it history the shroud was exposed to the elements and partly burned during a fire, all of which could affect the results of a test. Although in this case, efforts, extreme, were made to make sure such things did not affect the results of the tests.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the control samples do overlap, I can trust those.
 
bobdroege7 said:
No that analogy is nothing like what I am talking about.

Then there is the problem that if it was a medieval forgery, the artist got the position of the crucifixion spikes wrong.

I have not been able to find a medieval painting of the crucifixion with the nails through the wrist as on the shroud, all the ones I have seen have the nails through the palm of the hands.
Click to expand...
If the artist had a large knowledge of human anatomy he would have known the structure of a hand would not hold the weight long.

A partial hand and wrist of a crucified person was found actually, 2nd century middle east I do believe, that had the nail through the wrist bones.

Name a well known artist in the area of Turin Italy, cerca 1350's that had extensive notes on human anatomy.
 
Last edited:
bobdroege7 said:
Yes, but the control samples do overlap, I can trust those.
Click to expand...
Sigh. First of all two of the samples do overlap! The third is moderately discordant. Which is NOT unusual in carbon 14 tests in the slightest.

Your notion that carbon 14 results in order to be reliable have to overlap is simply wrong. Carbon 14 testing gives approximate dates and frequently the standard deviations do not overlap testing the same item. This is no surprise.

Please produce the evidence that the samples taken from the shroud one or more was from something else. Given the extreme efforts that were made to ensure that it was the case that the three samples came from the shroud. All three agree that the shroud is less than half has old as it should be if it was the burial shroud of Jesus. I note that the Oxford sample is just 20 years off from overlapping. Which is not much. I've seen much greater differences.

If all you basically have is a 20 year difference, i.e., 720 and 700 that is pretty weak to argue that different samples were were tested and one or more were not from the shroud.
 
Last edited:
8enotto said:
If the artist had a large knowledge of human anatomy he would have known the structure of a hand would not hold the weight long.

A partial hand and wrist of a crucified person was found actually, 2nd century middle east I do believe, that had the nail through the wrist bones.

Name a well known artist in Turin Italy, cerca 1350's that had extensive notes on human anatomy.
Click to expand...
Why Turin Italy, circa 1350?

Well I don't know of any artists in Turin Italy, or Lirey France that knew how to do a roman crucifixion. Because they all painted crucifixions with the nails through the palms.

Unless you know of one, I could be wrong, not being an expert on depictions of crucifixions in medieval art. I just don't know of any with the nails through the wrists.

Or the forger had medical knowledge or crucifixion knowledge not known extensively at the time.

I thought there were only two examples of crucifixion nails through heel bones, I did not know of any through the wrist.
 
Last edited:
bobdroege7 said:
Why Turin Italy, circa 1350?

Well I don't know of any artists in Turin Italy, or Lirey France that knew how to do a roman crucifixion. Because they all painted crucifixions with the nails through the palms.

Unless you know of one, I could be wrong, not being an expert on depictions of crucifixions in medieval art. I just don't know of any with the nails through the wrists.

Or the forger had medical knowledge or crucifixion knowledge not known extensively at the time.

I thought there were only two examples of crucifixion nails through heel bones, I did not know of any through the wrist.
Click to expand...
I wasn't there either. But Leonardo DaVinci was under the patronage of the powers that be at the time in that place. He had extensive notes on human anatomy and access to dead bodies at the time. Something rather difficult to get for most then. It wasn't considered good to dissect people.
He is mentioned in expense records of his patronage according to two books about the shroud I once had.
 
bobdroege7 said:
No that analogy is nothing like what I am talking about.

Then there is the problem that if it was a medieval forgery, the artist got the position of the crucifixion spikes wrong.

I have not been able to find a medieval painting of the crucifixion with the nails through the wrist as on the shroud, all the ones I have seen have the nails through the palm of the hands.
Click to expand...
You can't nail someone up by nails through the palms. It's been tried.
 
catsmate said:
...likewise the position of the body with hands folded across the genitals which simply isn't possible for a body lying flat (the arms aren't long enough)
Click to expand...
Ironically, that's explained by evolution. 2,000 years ago people were much more closely related to gibbons than they are now.
 
Mojo said:
Ironically, that's explained by evolution. 2,000 years ago people were much more closely related to gibbons than they are now.
Click to expand...
On an aside I recently has the chance to her a pair of gibbons call to each other, fascinating creatures.
 
Mojo said:
Where did you read it?
Click to expand...
It was published in PLOS One and then retracted when the methodology was found to be...... questionable. It was the second retraction of a paper by Liberato De Caro and fellow shroudies in that journal and led to communications with his employer. There were also questions about the provenance of supposed shroud fibres and the lack of controls.
It remains garbage pseudo-science.
 
catsmate said:
On an aside I recently has the chance to her a pair of gibbons call to each other, fascinating creatures.
Click to expand...
"Gimme an oooh!"
"OOOH!"
"Gimme another oooh!"
"OOOH"
"Gimme an oooh!"
"OOOH!"
"Now put 'em together and what have you got?"
 
bobdroege7 said:
Fairly certain, I can agree to that, but that leaves a window for evidence to show it is of the Roman era.

Here are the dates from wiki, one standard deviation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin
  • Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
  • Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
  • Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
The dates don't overlap, but the dates on the control samples including the one from the other Queen Cleopatra does overlap.

I am confident in the dates produced by the labs, I just think there is something up with the shroud sample, in other words since the three samples dates do not overlap, that means the three samples are not of the same thing, ie, not the shroud.
Click to expand...
I haven't time to go into detail, but your conclusion that non-overlap of one standard deviation intervals "means the three samples are not of the same thing" is mistaken.

Even if null hypothesis significant tests were appropriate here, and p < 5% was an appropriate significance level, and correction for multiple comparisons wasn't a "thing", then ± one standard deviation wouldn't be appropriate.
 
Mojo said:
"Gimme an oooh!"
"OOOH!"
"Gimme another oooh!"
"OOOH"
"Gimme an oooh!"
"OOOH!"
"Now put 'em together and what have you got?"
Click to expand...
Darat said:
Funky Gibbon


Yeah I know I'll get my coat and my old age pension.
Click to expand...
No problem, it's still mine when I hear about them. Which is more common than might be expected due to Monkey Life.
KAJ said:
I haven't time to go into detail, but your conclusion that non-overlap of one standard deviation intervals "means the three samples are not of the same thing" is mistaken.

Even if null hypothesis significant tests were appropriate here, and p < 5% was an appropriate significance level, and correction for multiple comparisons wasn't a "thing", then ± one standard deviation wouldn't be appropriate.
Click to expand...
Exactly. But people who want/need to believe will jump on anything.
 
8enotto said:
I wasn't there either. But Leonardo DaVinci was under the patronage of the powers that be at the time in that place. He had extensive notes on human anatomy and access to dead bodies at the time. Something rather difficult to get for most then. It wasn't considered good to dissect people.
He is mentioned in expense records of his patronage according to two books about the shroud I once had.
Click to expand...
Leonardo da Vinci was born in 1452 and died in 1519. The shroud was first displayed about a century before he was born.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom