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

[pgwenthold]

According to WebMD, REM sleep occurs within 90 minutes of falling asleep. But morning wood is triggered by testosterone levels peaking in the morning. The ◊◊◊◊ I learn here.

That's no way true. For me, REM sleep is throughout the night, but absolutely does occur in the morning. I don't want to go through the hassle of showing my sleep record from my app, but last night fell asleep at about 10 pm, deep sleep around 10:50, some REM sleep at midnight, 1:30, 3 am, 4 am and then a long stretch from about 5:30 to probably 6:15

And that is not uncommon.

 

[Darat]

At least we are learning about something in this thread! Don't knock it ..er... down.

 

[bobdroege7]

Okay so here's another test you can do. Since...

... you will have to paint yourself in a non-toxic ink and have a piece of cloth wrapped around you like a shroud. Then carefully take it off (so it doesn't smudge the image) and see whether the impression looks remotely like the image on the Shroud of Turin. I guarantee that it will not.

However you look at it, the image on the Shroud of Turin is not human-shaped. Especially if you consider that a burial shroud is wrapped around a body, and not simply draped over the top of it.

The image on the shroud is not ink, so what will that experiment prove?

 

[bobdroege7]

Yes, I invited you to offer a hypothesis to explain the non-overlapping dates. Then I asked you what evidence favored that hypothesis, but all you had was a circular argument.


Asked and answered. Even if we accept for the sake of argument that the statistics claim is true, your argument is still circular.

You need to explain how failing the chi^2 test is a circular argument.

The explanation that the dates are not overlapping is that the samples are not homogenous, or not the same thing.

That should be pretty obvious.

The Pray Codex show a picture of the shroud with identifying marks that show it was around before the carbon 14 dates.

 

[GlennB]

dupe

 

[GlennB]

You need to explain how failing the chi^2 test is a circular argument.

The explanation that the dates are not overlapping is that the samples are not homogenous, or not the same thing.

That should be pretty obvious.

The Pray Codex show a picture of the shroud with identifying marks that show it was around before the carbon 14 dates.

What are you hoping to show here? That the shroud might be genuine?

 

[bobdroege7]

You keep on saying the samples were heterogenous, supporting this with statistical arguments. Pre-retirement I spent several decades as a statistician with a special interest in uncertainty of measurement. I consider your statistical approaches spectacularly inappropriate. I tried to suggest this gently in my earlier reply (#98) but you don't seem to have taken that on board.

Despite my experience, I have neither the time or access to the data to form a firm personal opinion on the heterogeneity. However an expert opinion from someone with "The results, together with the statistical assessment of the data prepared in the British Museum" was included in the Wikiwand and Wikipedia articles, both of which you linked to without mentioning this point.

If you want to continue with your heterogeneity argument, you really need to address that expert opinion.

I am not questioning the dating, I am questioning the sampling.

Can you explain why the control samples are homogenous and the shroud samples are not?

 

[bobdroege7]

What are you hoping to show here? That the shroud might be genuine?

Yes, and therefore christianity is a fraud.

But we already knew that, right?

 

[Thermal]

The image on the shroud is not ink, so what will that experiment prove?

That the way a draped cloth would transmit an image is not remotely like the 2-D portrait on the Shroud.

The face in particular would be comically wide, because of the nose peaking the cloth.

And as Mr Wollipot said, that's not how a body was laid out. It was more like mummy wrapped, wound around.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

That's no way true. For me, REM sleep is throughout the night, but absolutely does occur in the morning. I don't want to go through the hassle of showing my sleep record from my app, but last night fell asleep at about 10 pm, deep sleep around 10:50, some REM sleep at midnight, 1:30, 3 am, 4 am and then a long stretch from about 5:30 to probably 6:15

And that is not uncommon.

How does your watch/app determine your sleep state? I understand it has something to do with eye movement. I.e., REM.

 

[KAJ]

I am not questioning the dating, I am questioning the sampling.

Can you explain why the control samples are homogenous and the shroud samples are not?

Again, you have said the shroud samples are not homogenous. I am saying that you have failed to adequately support that statement and to address the expert opinion that (emphasis added).

As reported in Nature, Anthos Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."

 

[bobdroege7]

That the way a draped cloth would transmit an image is not remotely like the 2-D portrait on the Shroud.

The face in particular would be comically wide, because of the nose peaking the cloth.

And as Mr Wollipot said, that's not how a body was laid out. It was more like mummy wrapped, wound around.

And how do you know it was mummy wrapped?

 

[bobdroege7]

Again, you have said the shroud samples are not homogenous. I am saying that you have failed to adequately support that statement and to address the expert opinion that (emphasis added).

Your source has failed to explain the heterogeneity, I am not impressed.

 

[Thermal]

And how do you know it was mummy wrapped?

From historical accounts of other first century Jewish burials. And the gospels themselves even refer to a seperate head wrapping, not a sheet draping. I mean, they were keeping a decomposing body together, not tucking it in for night-night.

And you skipped over the 2-D portrait problem. It's rather fatal to declaring the Shroud to be anything but a fake.

 

[JayUtah]

You need to explain how failing the chi^2 test is a circular argument.

No, that's not the part I claimed was circular. I pointed out the circularity to you. It appears I'll have to do it again.

The explanation that the dates are not overlapping is that the samples are not homogenous, or not the same thing.

You claim that the samples are heterogeneous as an explanation for why the dates do not overlap. I asked to you to provide a hypothesis for how the samples got that way. You offered the hypothesis that the archbishop switched samples. I asked you for evidence that this was the right hypothesis, and you told me the heterogeneity of the samples was evidence that the bishop had switched the samples. That is a textbook circular argument.

That should be pretty obvious.

People who offer circular arguments frequently want to say that the logic is obvious.

The Pray Codex show a picture of the shroud with identifying marks that show it was around before the carbon 14 dates.

That's not evidence that the archbishop switched the samples.

 

[bobdroege7]

Again, you have said the shroud samples are not homogenous. I am saying that you have failed to adequately support that statement and to address the expert opinion that (emphasis added).

Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin

Look at table two, and the reported X^2 value of 6.4.

That's where the inhomogeneity comes from.

 

[KAJ]

Your source has failed to explain the heterogeneity, I am not impressed.

Sigh. One more time.
You have failed to adequately demonstrate the heterogeneity. Until you do so, there is nothing to explain.
What you refer to as "my source" is the Wiki pages you linked to and the original Nature publication of the results.
I am not impressed with your statistical understanding.

 

[bobdroege7]

From historical accounts of other first century Jewish burials. And the gospels themselves even refer to a seperate head wrapping, not a sheet draping. I mean, they were keeping a decomposing body together, not tucking it in for night-night.

And you skipped over the 2-D portrait problem. It's rather fatal to declaring the Shroud to be anything but a fake.

No, I have addressed that, it's not a portrait.

If it is a forgery, where did the forger get the rare limestone from Jerusalem?

 

[bobdroege7]

Sigh. One more time.
You have failed to adequately demonstrate the heterogeneity. Until you do so, there is nothing to explain.
What you refer to as "my source" is the Wiki pages you linked to and the original Nature publication of the results.
I am not impressed with your statistical understanding.

So, what is your explanation for the X^2 value for the shroud, compared to the much lower values for the control samples?

 

[Thermal]

No, I have addressed that, it's not a portrait.

But you are wrong. I just took paper towels and draped them across my face, holding the ends where it made contact with the ears. Then I laid it flat. My face should have looked nearly twice as wide on the paper towels as it would look in 2-D. The Shroud does not reflect this draping, and shows a face in proportion to its body (although longer and thinner in the opposite direction).

Honestly, that's enough for me. It can't be what it claims to be.

{Eta: basically the same issue as the OP, on the other axis}

If it is a forgery, where did the forger get the rare limestone from Jerusalem?

Don't know, don't care. Anomaly hunting is not that interesting when it can't be what it claims to be, based on its own portrait image.