• 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 / Blood on the shroud

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jabba said:
In case anyone was worried -- not to worry, we're out west visiting our son and his wife, and my time is especially limited.

In case you need something to read, you can read my very brief auto(alleged)biography at http://messiahornot.com/Biography2.php. I'm not just a kook.

--- Jabba
Click to expand...
C14
I read your biography.
Thank you for serving our country. I am 4F and cannot serve.
C14
I do not understand how this biography helps in any way to evaluate any part of this thread.
C14
Take your time and enjoy your trip.
C14
If you do come back to the thread focus only on C14.
C14
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
C14
1) I read your biography.
2) Thank you for serving our country. I am 4F and cannot serve.
C14
3) I do not understand how this biography helps in any way to evaluate any part of this thread.
C14
4) Take your time and enjoy your trip.
C14
5)If you do come back to the thread focus only on C14.
C14
Click to expand...
Ladewig,
Re #1: Thanks.
Re #2: You're very welcome.
Re #3: Only that it might make someone think a little more positive about my claims...
Re #4: Thanks again.
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
--- Jabba
 
Jabba said:
Ladewig,
Re #1: Thanks.
Re #2: You're very welcome.
Re #3: Only that it might make someone think a little more positive about my claims...
Re #4: Thanks again.
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
--- Jabba
Click to expand...

Other than moving backwards, I don't know that it's possible for this discussion to be any slower.
 
Jabba said:
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
--- Jabba
Click to expand...

I do not think it's possible to go any slower...I mean, I've read all 42 pages of this thread over the months and months, and came to a conclusion or two long ago, these being:

1. Neither Jabba, nor anyone else, has any actual evidence to contradict the carbon-14 dating. Therefore, the shroud doesn't date from anywhere near 30AD - end of story.

2. Like any other theist, no amount of logical explanations will budge them from their absolute need to believe - since they arrived at their believe without using logic (and facts, and evidence) - none of that has any effect on convincing them otherwise. If he admits he is wrong, he also has to come to understand that much of his life has been a waste - this is a painful thing for anyone to go through, and (to an extent) I sympathize. But he put himself in this, and only he can pull himself back out and join reality. I think it's a lost cause, and hopeless in his case (of course I could be wrong, as I am frequently.)

And lastly,

3. Jabba has been using the same misdirection techniques for years, at other websites & forums, with no more luck than he's had here.

I've lost any ability to respect Jabba due to his slimy techniques.
 
Jabba said:
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
Click to expand...

The blood issue is of no importance. There is no point in doing both. It will work out immediately, rather than in the end' if you deal with the C14.
As has been explained to you, if the bit of fabric did not exist in the time of Christ, blood or tomato sauce stains are irrelevant.
 
Mashuna said:
Other than moving backwards, I don't know that it's possible for this discussion to be any slower.
Click to expand...

Actually we're going to discuss the Shroud, I'll do it in my next post.

-Jabba
 
Re #3: Only that it might make someone think a little more positive about my claims...
Click to expand...
Nothing you can say about yourself can influence my view, at least, of your claims. It's the evidence that's against you, not your personality.

Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
Click to expand...
The blood is irrelevent without the C14 data, as we've pointed out to you. Even if there's real blood on the cloth, if the cloth dates from the 13th or 14th century there's nothing more to discuss. You cannot have a burial shroud that dates more than a millennium after the death of the person it was intended to cover.
 
Tinyal said:
I do not think it's possible to go any slower...I mean, I've read all 42 pages of this thread over the months and months, and came to a conclusion or two long ago, these being:

1. Neither Jabba, nor anyone else, has any actual evidence to contradict the carbon-14 dating. Therefore, the shroud doesn't date from anywhere near 30AD - end of story.

2. Like any other theist, no amount of logical explanations will budge them from their absolute need to believe - since they arrived at their believe without using logic (and facts, and evidence) - none of that has any effect on convincing them otherwise. If he admits he is wrong, he also has to come to understand that much of his life has been a waste - this is a painful thing for anyone to go through, and (to an extent) I sympathize. But he put himself in this, and only he can pull himself back out and join reality. I think it's a lost cause, and hopeless in his case (of course I could be wrong, as I am frequently.)

And lastly,

3. Jabba has been using the same misdirection techniques for years, at other websites & forums, with no more luck than he's had here.

I've lost any ability to respect Jabba due to his slimy techniques.
Click to expand...

It's a weak and weaseling faith that needs proof.


---tsig
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Re #3: Only that it might make someone think a little more positive about my claims...
Click to expand...

Why?
(1)Your entire argument against the C14 dating consists of extravagant innuendo, wild speculation, and unfounded attacks against world-famous textile experts.

(2)You believe every single claim made by a Shroud supporter and discount every single claim made by independent sources.

(3)You have so little understanding of the rules of evidence that even after hearing our arguments dozens of times, you cannot accurately summarize any one of our points without going back and searching this thread.

(4)You have shown absolutely no understanding of how science works and which aspects of it are the most important.

Even before I read your biography, I knew you were a sincere but unknowledgeable believer. That is a strong claim on my part, so let me support it. Earlier in this thread you claimed that the Shroud of Turin was one the most studied artifacts in modern history. We explained exactly why that claim is 100% incorrect. I could not be more confident that if we asked you today if the Shroud were one of the most studied artifacts in modern history you would agree with that claim.

................
ETA: if any other poster in this thread believes I have mischaracterized Jabba in any of these four points, please speak up.
 
Last edited:
Jabba said:
Ladewig,
Re #1: Thanks.
Re #2: You're very welcome.
Re #3: Only that it might make someone think a little more positive about my claims...
Re #4: Thanks again.
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
--- Jabba
Click to expand...

The 14C data convincingly shows the S of T did not exist at the time of Christ. Why do you want to talk about stains on a cloth that can not be the burial shroud of Christ?
 
Jabba said:
Re #5: No. I have a choice also; and mine is the blood issue. We'll do both. It'll all work out in the end, only slower.
--- Jabba
Click to expand...


There's no point in saying anything about any blood if the C14 dates are right and the shroud is 13th-14th century.

Before you say another word, you need to simply answer Yes or No to whether you have a genuine independent science paper claiming the C14 is wrong ... well do you?

Yes or No?


Until you can bring yourself to answer that incredibly simple question, which will take you all of 5 seconds, the thread can never proceed.
 
IanS said:
There's no point in saying anything about any blood if the C14 dates are right and the shroud is 13th-14th century.

Before you say another word, you need to simply answer Yes or No to whether you have a genuine independent science paper claiming the C14 is wrong ... well do you?

Yes or No?


Until you can bring yourself to answer that incredibly simple question, which will take you all of 5 seconds, the thread can never proceed.
Click to expand...

The object is not to proceed but to keep it circulating around the drain.
 
Jabba said:
No sense of humor either...
Click to expand...

You're right, I don't. Not when it comes to the areas of science I've studied--which includes radiocarbon dating. Your arguments are flawed, and often insulting, and I've little patience for that sort of thing.

If you wish to make this a discussion about our respective personalities, you will be admitting that you cannot address the issues that I've raised. If you're not, than this statement is completely irrelevant (more so than it already is, seeing as my statement about my interest in your biography has nothing to do with my sense of humor--your biography has nothing to do with this discussion). It's either an ad hominem or a red herring; either way it's not a valid argument against anything.

If you wish to discuss radiocarbon dating, please demonstrate you understand the basics, at least. Please how how much carbon 14 must be added to make a 1st century cloth appear to be from the 13th century. If you can't do that, please admit that you don't know what you're talking about and are unwilling to do the research to learn it (the equations are widely available online). Once you've made that admission, you'll at least have demonstrated that you're honest. Until you do, you will have demonstrated nothing but an unwavering aversion to facts in this thread.

As for the blood, it seems to me that you are unaware of the fact that the blood did not necessarily have to come after the image if the shroud is a fraud. What I mean is, it's entirely possible that the artist put the blood on (assuming ad arguendum that it WAS blood--this is by no means an acceptance of your arguments) and then painted the image around the blood. The resultant image would have the holes under the bloodstains that you keep talking about but never proving, without the artist needing to leave holes in the image in the perfect shape. So even if it's real blood, and even if there's no image below the blood stains, it's still not proof of authenticity. It could still very easily have been a con job.

Belz... said:
Need I remind everyone that, even if the shroud is genuine, it raises some serious questions ?
Click to expand...
Even if it's genuine, we may be entirely unable to prove it. And if we can't prove it, we're left with nothing more than a curious historical relic--even less significant than if the shroud were a fraud. At least a verified fraud can tell us something about the con men involved and the culture they were living in. An unverifiable artifact is nothing more than a badly-rendered image on a decaying cloth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom