Akri,
- Welcome aboard.
- Try this.
1. The stains are real blood.
2. They could not have been PAINTED on the Shroud.
3. They had to be “imprinted” on from a real, dead human.
4. This human was crucified.
5. A 14th century artisan able to produce this image would have to be an absolute genius.
6. He would be able to produce an artifact that even 21st century scientists cannot.
7. The wounds fit perfectly with those of the Biblical Jesus and modern medicine.
8. They do not all agree with tradition.
9. This artisan genius would also have to be sociopathic.
10. He would also have to be rich.
11. He should also be famous, and have produced other images of the same genre.
12. He probably wasn’t Leonardo.
- Therefore: it is EXTREMELY improbable that the Shroud is a fake from the 14th century.
--- Jabba
I am betting you will ignore this like you ingored 10000 other post telling you are wrong, but hey let me try the "show jabba he is wrong only to be subsequently ignored" game.
(1). is not demonstrated but even if it was :
(2) You can paint with blood. Example amy winehouse vincent castelgliana (sp?). You can paint with all sort of liquid or semi liquid, including urine, feces. Therefore your point 2 is invalid.
Due to (2) being invalid you CANNOT claim (3) as logical reasonning
(5) is wrong, because it assume a 14th century person CANNOT be a genius. It is wrong. There could be genius there and then as of today. Middle age people were like us you know, mostly, jsut the education sucked hard. But artisan, were learning by doing folk, and very good artisan painted the sixtine capel for example. Your dead guy isn't even on that level frankly.
(6) mostly because nobody care to reproduce it. There is nothing absolutely nothing which looks complicated on the bloody cloth (haha). It isn't even a true corpse as a true corpse would be deformed (already told you that). There has been attempt at reproduction (you were also told that) which are good enough for the money invested.
It is the same stupid argument people use to say that pyramid were constructed by ancient alien "haha you boogy bugger scientist can't even reproduce a pyramid/machu pichu today", or the megalithe, until somebody build their own megalithe using a hammer , some wood , and stone, and a few corde and *NO* complciated mechanism, not even a wheel. Just plain wood hammer and corde.
The main reason nobody does the same type of painting is because it is boring, would not sell much, and has no real skill value.
(9) And ? Sociopath exists, sociopath existed in the 14th century. Ever heard of vlad the impaler ? The guy which hammered nail in the skull of a living guy ?
For pity's sake , impaling thru anus or vagina, and other gruesome treatment , like quartering or pulling the entrail of a still living person was done routinely. *torture* aka questionning was done routinely to extract confession.
And you tell us you doubt ana rtist would be a sociopath ?
but more importantely you do not need to be a sociopath to sell to church idiot a relic back on the 14th century, you jsut need
to be a bloody thief scammer wanting to make money off a few suckers.
(10) nothing in the story indicate a rich person would have to abck this up. in fact a normal relic scammer (not rich not poor) would be more likely.
You jsut are piling stuff pulled out of thin air in the intention to make it less likely without having evidence of this
(11) or he would be an intelligent scammer
stopping when he got enough money to continue living with ease. Remember he was a genius (haha). OR the
other fake relic were less sucessful and were simply discarded by shamed sucker which wanted to rather have the proof disappear they were gotten.
just like today when suckers would rather not admit they were scammed.
Your reasonning fall apart on many point.
Go back to the drawing board.
