Miracle of the Shroud / Blood on the shroud

[Pope130]

Pope,
- No. So far, I think that other investigators knew about Gonella's access, and that his "tampering" was fully authorized.
--- Jabba

Which investigators and where do they say that? References please.

 

[tsig]

tsig,
- What piercing are you talking about?
--- Jabba

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

 

[tsig]

Carbon 14

dafydd

Yes, someone seems deliberately obtuse.

 

[Ladewig]

- The next issue that we can probably agree to disagree about is "what actually makes for 'progress.'"
- I think that precisely identifying a "basic" disagreement is progress; you probably don't.

--- Jabba

I see absolutely no reason to discuss to the point of resolution the definition of progress. My repeated requests for your definition of progress have absolutely nothing to do with determining the Shroud's creation date. I was asking because I was curious as to how your mind works.

In the same vein, when I requested that we discuss the distortions, my goal was not to arrive at any consensus regarding the authenticity of the Shroud's creation, my goal was to understand how a true believer explains away the dimensions that (1) show that such a man would be so deformed that Levitical Law would have prevented him from entering the temple and (2) match the dimensions used in artwork of the 1300's.

 

[IanS]

Ian,

- But aren't you the one that recommended that I buy, and read, Harry Gove's book? Gonella's obituary is really pretty short...
- If you insist, I'll see what relates to your question, and post it here -- though, there's a lot.

- By the way, I did buy Gove's book, Relic, Icon or Hoax. I haven't read it yet -- being a very slow reader -- but I have skimmed it, and like the way he writes...

--- Jabba

I did not ask you to quote anything from Gove's book, did I? On the contrary I specifically told you what it said in Gove’s book by quoting it to you!

Look - you posted a link to Gonella's obituary, suggesting that it gave evidence of Gonella telling Rogers, quote " he excised some threads from the centre of the C14 sample " ...

... if you posted the link claiming it said anything like that, then surely you know which words you are referring to in that obituary link?

Or are you just posting links without you yourself having any idea what they say?

 

[tsig]

Ian,

- But aren't you the one that recommended that I buy, and read, Harry Gove's book? Gonella's obituary is really pretty short...
- If you insist, I'll see what relates to your question, and post it here -- though, there's a lot.

- By the way, I did buy Gove's book, Relic, Icon or Hoax. I haven't read it yet -- being a very slow reader -- but I have skimmed it, and like the way he writes...

--- Jabba

You really should ask your self why you want this piece of cloth to have touched Jesus.

 

[Ladewig]

- But Paladin, I was responding to the following request by Ian.
OK, fine so just provide a reference which says that Gonella was authorised to remove part of the C14 sample at any time.
- To me at least, Gonella's obituary makes it sound like he was the one doing the autherizing.
--- Jabba

Written accounts indicate that the team removed the backing, cut the sample, divided the sample into three parts, wrapped each part in foil, and deposited the wrapped samples in stainless steel containers. Several people witnessed all these steps so that everyone who has an interest in the Shroud would know that the pieces sent to the laboratories were actually pieces of the Shroud. Please look up "provenance" and "chain of evidence" to understand how important this step was.

So, my questions to you are, in your hypothesized scenario, did Gonella removed the thread before or after the backing was removed? And why did Gonella not follow standard protocol and have someone witness his collection of the thread?

 

[catsmate]

- From Rogers' paper
…On 12 December 2003, I received samples of both warp and weft threads that Prof. Luigi Gonella
had taken from the radiocarbon sample before it was distributed for dating. Gonella reported that
he excised the threads from the center of the radiocarbon sample…

As has been pointed out, repeatedly, this simply isn't true; the procedure for the sampling was given in this thread and Gonella did not retain any of the fibres.
Rogers is lying.

- So Ian, do you know one of the following:
1) That Gonella didn't have access to the Shroud prior to the actual cutting -- or,
2) That he wouldn't have known where the cutting was to be made when he did have access?
- If you do, can you give me a citation?

You, and Rogers, are making the claim that Gonella had access to the samples and retained part of them. You get to produce the evidence for this.

Ian (and others),

- At this point, I think that you and I can precisely identify one of the basic issues that we disagree about -- i.e., who has responsibility to present evidence supporting their side. I believe that both sides are responsible for presenting evidence; you believe that only my side (because of the nature of my claims) is responsible for presenting evidence.
- I suspect that if we can ever come to agreement on this issue, it will take a long time -- so, for now at least, I will try to put it aside, and focus on
1) other areas for which we should be able to identify the basic disagreements, and
2) areas that seem to have better chances of resolving.

- The next issue that we can probably agree to disagree about is "what actually makes for 'progress.'"
- I think that precisely identifying a "basic" disagreement is progress; you probably don't.

--- Jabba

The issue of the radiocarbon dating is settled. If you wish to propound an alternate scenario you need to support it with evidence.
Evidence not vague scenarios, dubious science and outright lies.

Pope,
- No. So far, I think that other investigators knew about Gonella's access, and that his "tampering" was fully authorized.
--- Jabba

We await your evidence for this.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

My objective is to show that the preponderance of evidence favors authenticity.

If that is your objective, then perhaps it's time you started thinking about presenting some evidence?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

tsig,
- What piercing are you talking about?
--- Jabba

Jesus had a Prince Albert. Look it up, it's in the Bible.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Or are you just posting links without you yourself having any idea what they say?

I think this should answer your question: http://faq.gardenweb.com/faq/lists/seed/2002114535011263.html

 

[dafydd]

Perhaps Jabba should start by proving the existence of this mythological Jesus.

 

[pakeha]

My, my.
I'm very curious about the way Jabba's mind works.

... the Vatican itself has publicly said that the C14 sample was definitely not from any patch, and was definitely part of the main body of the shroud.

So it would not matter even if Rogers did have some fibres from the centre of the C14 sample. Because the above quote makes crystal clear that the C14 sample was not from any patch or anything of the sort, but was certainly part of the main body of the shroud.

When are we going to get to the point where Jabba explains why he has doubts about the C14 dating?

Which immediately reminded of the 419 Eater's version of that sketch... brilliant!

http://youtu.be/X-XeFuBGvqs

Awesome.

Ian (and others),

- At this point, I think that you and I can precisely identify one of the basic issues that we disagree about -- i.e., who has responsibility to present evidence supporting their side. I believe that both sides are responsible for presenting evidence; you believe that only my side (because of the nature of my claims) is responsible for presenting evidence.
- I suspect that if we can ever come to agreement on this issue, it will take a long time -- so, for now at least, I will try to put it aside, and focus on
1) other areas for which we should be able to identify the basic disagreements, and
2) areas that seem to have better chances of resolving.

- The next issue that we can probably agree to disagree about is "what actually makes for 'progress.'"
- I think that precisely identifying a "basic" disagreement is progress; you probably don't.

--- Jabba

C14 dating.
Defined some time ago and we're still waiting to read your reasons for doubting the C14 dating of the Shroud.

Paheka,

- I've tried to respond to your post below before, but if I actually succeeded, I can't find my response -- so, I'll have to try again.
Re#1:
1) Apparently, Rogers took 32 tapes from all over the Shroud, and I had assumed that at least one of those was taken from the offending corner. I'll have to go back to his paper and see if he really indicates that...
2) Otherwise, given that he was actually given samples of the dating area by Gonella, he would still need samples from the rest of the Shroud for comparison.
Re#2:
1) I had understood that the offending corner was one of the two corners typically held/handled when displaying the Shroud, that handling affected dating results and that areas of relatively extreme handling have therefore been avoided when doing carbon dating.
2) It is claimed that said corner had a substantial bio-plastic coating not found on the rest of the Shroud, and I had assumed said coating was the result of handling (I'll have to check if there is any mention of that 2nd corner in regard to this issue).

--- Jabba

Offending corner?
What do you mean?
Where is your evidence there is some reason to doubt the C14 dating?
Please back up your claims, Jabba.

.... My objective is to show that the preponderance of evidence favors authenticity.

--- Jabba

Please show this evidence.

Ian,
- How about this? http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/n67part8.pdf
--- Jabba

Have you really given a link to an obituary?
Is that the best you have to show on the subject?

- ... To me at least, Gonella's obituary makes it sound like he was the one doing the autherizing.
--- Jabba

And?

 

[IanS]

Jabba - please be clear that this line of yours about the possibility of Gonella secretly removing threads from the site of the C14 sample, before that sample area was ever known or cut, is a blind alley anyway. And it will be entirely irrelevant even if you ever do find a quote from Gonella saying he took and illicit sample.

Why? Why will it be irrelavent anyway? Because neither Gonella nor Rogers are independent unbiased witnesses in any of this. On the contrary they are both life-long fanatical Christian believers in the shroud.

Even if Gonella ever had claimed to have taken any such sample, there would be no evidence that such a claim was true. Whereas, all the known evidence is very clearly to the contrary, in so far as the C14 sample is known to have been cut by Riggi in front of 20-30 people under video filming. And it was not possible for Gonella to somehow intervene without anyone noticing and take away part of the sample out of Riggi’s hands from right under the nose of Michael Tite who was standing next to Riggi waiting to be handed the three pieces!

What you are suggesting is that Gonella might have once claimed that he’d taken a sample at an earlier date, which just by some massive coincidence happened to be as Rogers claimed “ from the centre of the C14 sample ”. But that can never be more than an un-evidenced claim, made 15 years after the event (iirc Rogers says he got the sample in 2003), by two individuals who are fanatical Christian shroud believers. That is not credible independent evidence in any sense at all.

As has been pointed out here numerous times now - the Vatican’s own science advisor has been quoted as saying that Rogers claim was complete nonsense and that in fact the C14 sample was definitely NOT from any patch as Rogers had claimed.

Apart from which, the whole reason for having so many people present when the C14 sample was cut, and for having the whole procedure filmed, plus photo-microscopic records taken of the cut region etc., was precisely to prevent this sort of “after-the-event” fabrication of complaints by dishonest pro shroud believers.

All three radiocarbon labs also reported at the time, that they had examined and photographed their samples under microscopic magnification, and it was certain that none of those samples had any trace of any repair or anything of the sort.

The evidence to show that the C14 sample was correctly taken, and not part of any patch or repair, is completely overwhelming. And it cannot be shifted by religious propaganda fantasies suggesting that maybe Gonella removed a bit when nobody was looking.

 

[Ladewig]

The evidence to show that the C14 sample was correctly taken, and not part of any patch or repair, is completely overwhelming. And it cannot be shifted by religious propaganda fantasies suggesting that maybe Gonella removed a bit when nobody was looking.

yes.

Jabba?

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

When are we going to get to the point where Jabba explains why he has doubts about the C14 dating?

We're not. He's declared he's going to move on to a different subject entirely, now. Ironically making a mockery of his own process of picking one thread of conversation and sticking to it.

 

[realpaladin]

- But Paladin, I was responding to the following request by Ian.
OK, fine so just provide a reference which says that Gonella was authorised to remove part of the C14 sample at any time.
- To me at least, Gonella's obituary makes it sound like he was the one doing the autherizing.
--- Jabba

But it never were his words... it only stated 'according to...

 

[catsmate]

Perhaps Jabba should start by proving the existence of this mythological Jesus.

It was suggested, he prefers to ignore that point.

 

[dafydd]

tsig,
- What piercing are you talking about?
--- Jabba

You are not familiar with the story of the crucifixion? The piercings do not appear because the artist forgot to paint them.

 

[Jabba]

But it never were his words... it only stated 'according to...

Paladin,

- I see what you mean...

- From the obituary,
Even so he stayed in touch with Shroud matters,
such that when in 2005 STURP scientist the late Dr.Ray Rogers published his
Thermochimica Acta paper claiming that the Shroud had been rewoven in the area
chosen for the carbon dating sample, Rogers acknowledged that some of his help had
come from Gonella, and surprisingly recently. According to Rogers:
‘on 12 December 2003 I received samples of both warp and weft threads that
Prof. Luigi Gonella had taken from the radiocarbon sample before it was
distributed for dating. Gonella reported that he excised the threads from the
center of the radiocarbon sample.’
This can only mean besides Riggi’s sample-taking for his own personal research
purposes on April 21 1988 (see previous obituary), Gonella, as the man ultimately in
charge of that day’s proceedings, had been busy doing much the same. As already
stressed in the case of Riggi, this is not to impugn either man’s integrity and good
faith. Nonetheless one can only wonder, how many more surprises of this kind may
yet be in store?

- However, notice that the Title I had applied to this particular sub-sub-sub-thread was "Gonella's Access and Autherization [sic]," and Ian's request had been that I "just provide a reference which says that Gonella was authorised [sic] to remove part of the C14 sample at any time." I immediately ran into his obituary which claims that Gonella was the man in charge of the proceedings anyway, and I assume would have been the man determining authorization in the first place...
- I figured I had thereby met Ian's request.
- I wasn't trying to provide a reference showing that Gonella had actually done what Rogers claimed, and didn't figure that I needed to. After all, when Rogers' article was published, Gonella was still alive, and apparently never contradicted Rogers claim. So, if Rogers lied about Gonellas' help, they must have been in cahoots. Besides, as far as I can tell Rogers was a stand-up guy, had begun his research on the Shroud as a skeptic, and had accepted the carbon dating until a few years before his death.

- Whatever, I'll be scouring the literature to find out more about Gonella's involvement, and see what comes up.

--- Jabba