Miracle of the Shroud / Blood on the shroud

[AdMan]

- Give me a chance, and you'll see that I'm not trying to avoid the hard questions.

Ha ha ha!

Good one!

You've been doing that for 45 pages.

 

[IanS]

Whether or not someone has made a replica of the cloth has absolutely nothing to do with the accuracy of the dating.
1000 replicas don't make the dating correct and zero replicas don't make it incorrect.
Just hit us with the evidence that the dating is incorrect.

Not just a cookie, you win a muffin.

Jabba, if all the people you encounter here are focused on evidence, it matters not whether you converse with one or hundreds. You will still find yourself in the position of having to address the carbon dating results. Nothing you have said thus far casts any doubt on those results. It's an open forum so you don't get to limit anyone's participation. You will find that another forty pages of you dodging every question will end up with several people getting fed up with the dishonesty, as a couple of people have already done.

Carbon dating. Address that.

Yep. Just do that. Don't do anything else!

Just be honest enough to admit that you do NOT have even one genuine independent scientist who has ever published any real research paper saying the C14 is wrong.

That has been the only question you needed to answer here for at least the last 30 pages. And it's now absolutely obvious to everyone that you do NOT have any such paper.

There’s nothing else left to say … there is no genuine scientific dispute about the validity of the C14 dates.

 

[Mashuna]

- Give me a chance, and you'll see that I'm not trying to avoid the hard questions.

--- Jabba

You had your chance, and blew it so hard there are three little pigs looking for compensation.

 

[zooterkin]

So....absolutely nothing. You KNOW that the image has nothing to do with C14 dating, but you insist that it does anyway. To add to that, you support this notion by sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" when we present definitive proof that you're wrong (and someone re-creating the shroud is definitive proof--meaning incontrovertible proof, evidence that can ONLY support a SINGLE conclusions--that the shroud can be faked).

Last chance, Jabba: Either provide the amount of contamination necessary for a 1st century cloth to give an age of the 14th century, or admit that you simply don't know, or I'm done. Your dishonesty, evasions, and obvious obfuscations are simply too annoying to continue with--they paint the picture of someone clearly unwilling to listen to anything anyone who doesn't agree with him has to say, and people like that aren't worth wasting time on. The peanut gallery already has this info, so there's absolutely no benefit to continuing this discussion if you're not even going to be honest.

So, if C14 shows it's 14C, why isn't Jabba suggesting we try using C1?

 

[pakeha]

...Re #1:
- I'm always in a hurry.

Hmm.
Speed counts in closing a snake-oil pitch to the rubes, but is hardly relevant in a discussion of C14 dating.

Re #2:
...- If I can show that no one today has been able to recreate certain critical aspects of the Shroud, I wouldn't be showing proof that the carbon dating was wrong, but in my own opinion at least, I would be showing significant evidence that it was wrong ...

What does opinion have to do with C14 dating?
Either provide the evidence which falsifies the dating or admit you cannot do so.

And no, Jabba, showing that modern repros aren't accurate doesn't show anything but that people haven't gotten it right yet.

... I can't accept that a God would want his followers to believe in a forgery, or for them to be dishonest.

Just so.

...- This will never be a level playing field, as all the potential spectators have already made up their minds as to who is right -- and, it isn't me. But, "one on one" would be a big step towards reducing the angle I have to negotiate.
- Give me a chance, and you'll see that I'm not trying to avoid the hard questions. ...

Jabba, it's not about being right.
It's about the C14 dating.
It's one issue.
One question.
Address it, please.

So, if C14 shows it's 14C, why isn't Jabba suggesting we try using C1?

 

[Jabba]

Carbon Dating

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

 

[Kid Eager]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

That's enough. You're on ignore.

 

[Akhenaten]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.

You've missed that everyone participating here, and doubtless many more who are playing at home, are no longer in any doubt that you have no intention of approaching this discussion with honesty and integrity.

You have not only completely destroyed your own credibility but set the cause for which you purport to be acting back into the middle ages (where it belongs).

- If you have a preference, let me know.

Do you know Melancholy Baby?

- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

No you won't. You'll continue waffling, stalling, delaying, handwaving, lying, obfuscating and endlessly reiterating the same drivel that you've been attempting to pass off as an argument for months.

Unlike the others, however, I find it highly amusing, not least because you're doing more to discredit theories that the Shroud of Turin is a noughth century artefact than a whole army of sceptics ever could.

 

[Agatha]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

Just the second one. Address the carbon dating or accept that you cannot impugn the 14th century date.

This is getting to be worse than an Yrreg or DOC thread - why is it so hard for you to debate honestly?

 

[Belz...]

So, if C14 shows it's 14C, why isn't Jabba suggesting we try using C1?

I'd use C4 on this thread if I could.

 

[Dinwar]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

Evasion noted. On Ignore you go.

 

[abaddon]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

[delurk]
You were asked on page 1 of this thread for your peer reviewed C14 evidence rebuttal. PAGE 1.

Yet, here we are on page 45, yes, that's PAGE 45 heading for 1800 posts and three months, and you are still asking if we want to see your C14 rebuttal? Really? Do you think that if you keep asking that question, it will somehow evaporate as an issue?

Let me guess, you will select from your 3 points above to argue whichever one is furthest away from C14.

You've missed that everyone participating here, and doubtless many more who are playing at home, are no longer in any doubt that you have no intention of approaching this discussion with honesty and integrity.

You have not only completely destroyed your own credibility but set the cause for which you purport to be acting back into the middle ages (where it belongs).


Do you know Melancholy Baby?


No you won't. You'll continue waffling, stalling, delaying, handwaving, lying, obfuscating and endlessly reiterating the same drivel that you've been attempting to pass off as an argument for months.

Unlike the others, however, I find it highly amusing, not least because you're doing more to discredit theories that the Shroud of Turin is a noughth century artefact than a whole army of sceptics ever could.

Agree totally.

[relurk]

 

[pakeha]

- OK. At the moment, I see three main issues that you guys wish me to address:
1) How much I know about carbon dating.
2) Can I point to any independent scientific paper arguing against the dating?
3) What does my claim that no one has been able to duplicate the image on the Shroud have to do with the carbon dating?

- If I've missed something, or not paraphrasing correctly, let me know.
- If you have a preference, let me know.
- Otherwise, I'll pick one of the above myself and try to address it in a way that will satisfy you guys.

--- Jabba

That's very good, Jabba.
Very good indeed.

Curiously enough, in those three choices you've given us you've managed to swerve around the question everyone has in common.

1) We already know the extent of your knowlege about C14 dating, Jabba.
2) If you had any link of interest, I'm sure you would have posted it up, especially since you've even posted the link to that Shroudie conference presentation.
3) We already know that an argument from incredulity is worth nothing here.

So what about it, Jabba?
Why not answer the question we've been asking now for 45 pages?

 

[Jabba]

CD - Scientific Papers

- OK, scientific papers it is.
- I'll be back.
--- jabba

 

[Olowkow]

Here's the answer that Jabba has been looking for. He figured this out 2 years ago, but I'm sure he simply forgot.

http://debate.atheist.net/showpost.php?p=73110&postcount=506

- While we can't prove that the Shroud existed before the 14th century, there's a lot of at least circumstantial evidence that it did. I'm trying to find the best synopsis of that apparent history.

http://debate.atheist.net/showpost.php?p=73522&postcount=518

After which, the thread is mercifully closed.

 

[Akhenaten]

- OK, scientific papers it is.
- I'll be back.
--- jabba

Of course you will. This place is the bug zapper of the Wooiverse and none can resist its fatal attraction.

 

[abaddon]

CD - Scientific Papers
- OK, scientific papers it is.
- I'll be back.
--- jabba

For a moment, I thought he was introducing controlled demolition.

We only asked for those 45 pages ago Jabba.

 

[Agatha]

Over/under on these scientific papers Jabba is getting for us being:

- http://www.metalog.org/files/shroud/C14.pdf -- Rogers
- http://uniroma.academia.edu/Emanuela..._of_the_Shroud -- Valencia
- http://shroud.com/pdfs/brown1.pdf -- Brown
- http://chemistry-today.teknoscienze....d CO4-08.pdf – Benford & Marino

??

 

[IanS]

- OK, scientific papers it is.

Make sure it's NOT any of the un-scientific "papers" that you've already linked here before from known shroud believers.

Make SURE it is from truly independent scientists, publishing in a genuine and known research journal (eg, like the C14 paper in Nature).

 

[Akhenaten]

Over/under on these scientific papers Jabba is getting for us being:

??

Melbourne to a rusty rabbit trap you've nailed it.

Also, I have a cookie here for each correct answer and I'm sure catsmate1 will match that offer, muffin for cookie.