Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

[John Jones]

Hans,
- OK. I'll start with the first one.
- I'll be back.

Spare us. Those points have all been debunked repeatedly. Don't take us on another trip through the dementia ward.

 

[Pixel42]

Personally I can't wait to hear how an instrument reading was affected by emotion. Presumably Jabba has evidence of telekinesis. Now that really would be something new to put on the table.

 

[Aepervius]

Even the famous Atheist Richard Dawkins admits it is controversial.

I am 99.99....9999 % sure it is either taken out of context or does not mean what you think it means.

Also your own shroudy colleague :

Dawkins, I am reminded, once commented on the Shroud. “Science can tell you the age of a particular fossil and that the Turin Shroud is a medieval fake,” he wrote in 1998. But that statement is old and was based on carbon dating done in 1988.

And that is pretty much clear cut. In fact they even challenge dawkins to prove it is a fake.

Care to quote the full context of the "controversy" ? Or will you ignore this and continue to lie ?


Or I can help you

The strip was divided in three parts and sent to three leading laboratories specializing in carbon dating, in Oxford, Arizona and Zurich. Working under conditions of scrupulous independence—not comparing notes—the three laboratories reported their verdicts on the date when the flax from which the cloth had been woven died. Oxford said ad 1200, Arizona 1304 and Zurich 1274. These dates are all—within normal margins of error—compatible with each other and with the date in the 1350s at which the shroud is first mentioned in history. The dating of the shroud remains controversial, but not for reasons that cast doubt on the carbon-dating technique itself. For example, the carbon in the shroud might have been contaminated by a fire, which is known to have occurred in 1532. I won’t pursue the matter further, because the shroud is of historical, not evolutionary, interest. It is a nice example, however, to illustrate the method, and the fact that, unlike dendrochronology, it is not accurate to the nearest year, only to the nearest century or so.

In other word jabba you LIED by cutting quote to make it looks as if it was supporting you when it does NOT.

 

[Aepervius]

Hans,
- They have all been addressed -- but, not resolved.
- Next Q/C?

They have been resolved, only NOT to your liking.

 

[marplots]

The carbon dating can't be relied on. It's a known fact that holy relics age much slower (if at all) than normal items. They are extremely resistant to rot and decay, and this would include breakdown of radioactive carbon.

Plainly, an early date for the carbon dating simply proves the "holiness" of the shroud itself. This should be obvious to believers, but quite troubling to those who don't think such a mechanism exists.

 

[Monza]

I was running a test this morning. We had a machine hooked up to a test stand. Accelerometers were mounted on the casing, RTDs were placed in the motor windings, and pressure transducers were installed in the upstream piping. Just before we started to record data the test engineer said, "How does everyone feel?"

I think he needs to know so he can put it in the instrument calibration curves.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hans,
- OK. I'll start with the first one.
- I'll be back.

*Shrug* Do what you must do, but don't deceive yourself: You cannot keep the problem unresolved by stalling the discussion. Until such time as you present relevant and important evidence, the case remains resolved.

Hans

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Faith

See, Jabba, thing is,

- You have no evidence placing the cloth in the first century.

- You have nothing that helps identify the dude in the image.

- Time's up.

- Admit your position is based on faith.

- You'll feel better.

- Wouldn't your god want you to be honest with yourself and others?

- Start wide, expand further, and never look back.

 

[Mojo]

*Shrug* Do what you must do, but don't deceive yourself: You cannot keep the problem unresolved by stalling the discussion.

That is precisely what he is trying to do, while "teaching the controversy".

Until such time as you present relevant and important evidence, the case remains resolved.

This is what Jabba can't, or won't, get. He wants a discussion in which the Holy Bed-Sheet is assumed to be authentic until the people he imagines to be the "prosecution" prove beyond reasonable doubt that it isn't, and in which he can prevent them doing this by filibustering.

 

[aleCcowaN]

This is what Jabba can't, or won't, get. He wants a discussion in which the Holy Bed-Sheet is assumed to be authentic until the people he imagines to be the "prosecution" prove beyond reasonable doubt that it isn't, and in which he can prevent them doing this by filibustering.

Then, we have to admit he knows himself well and his crowd too, because that is nothing more than buying more of the same crap they bought the first time so, what's the harm to the tiger in having one more stripe, if you catch my drift?

The only problem I see is Jabba mixing up this site with the church, thinking he can come here to repeat monotonous litanies in a ritualistic manner.

 

[John Jones]

[...]

The only problem I see is Jabba mixing up this site with the church, thinking he can come here to repeat monotonous litanies in a ritualistic manner.

He's definitely doing that for a number of years now.

I've got to ask myself: "How many times am I willing to sit through this repetitive garbage?"

 

[MRC_Hans]

That is precisely what he is trying to do, while "teaching the controversy".

Problem is, for him, that nobody really listens.

This is what Jabba can't, or won't, get. He wants a discussion in which the Holy Bed-Sheet is assumed to be authentic until the people he imagines to be the "prosecution" prove beyond reasonable doubt that it isn't, and in which he can prevent them doing this by filibustering.

Which is exactly why I am pointing out that he has lost till he provides evidence to the contrary.

Hans

 

[abaddon]

Suckers. Once again Jabba fringe resets while playing with members sympathy. How many times must one fall for it before getting a clue? Is there some sort of dishonesty threshold? Perhaps a fringe reset limit? Shall we accept one, two, three. four or how many fringe resets?

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

Suckers. Once again Jabba fringe resets while playing with members sympathy. How many times must one fall for it before getting a clue? Is there some sort of dishonesty threshold? Perhaps a fringe reset limit? Shall we accept one, two, three. four or how many fringe resets?

I say not unto thee, until seven times, but, until seventy times seven.

 

[Rincewind]

I say not unto thee, until seven times, but, until seventy times seven.

So you mean last year then?

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

So you mean last year then?

 

[SezMe]

Care to quote the full context of the "controversy" ? Or will you ignore this and continue to lie ?

I can answer that one.

*Shrug* Do what you must do, but don't deceive yourself: You cannot keep the problem unresolved by stalling the discussion.

Actually, that is exactly what he is successfully done.

There are two solutions. My first suggestion was sent to AAH. The other one is for ISF posters to stop interacting with Jabba. This farce will continue until one of those two options is acted upon.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Jabba's modus operandi*:

The shroud can't be replicated. It's a magical object

The C14 dating tells its from late 1300s. It's controversial

Do you want me to talk about this? I'll be back

I didn't say anything this time. I'll be back

I have nothing to contribute, but I'll be back (this is not over yet)

I can't do what I promised before, but I'll be back (this is not over yet)

I'll be back (this is not over yet)

I'll be back (this is just the beginning)

I'll be back (this goes to say that the evidence doesn't lean towards one side or another)

I'll be back (this is a hot topic now)

I'll be back (read my website; buy something; alleluia!)

I'll be back (we still have a lot to talk about)

I'll be back

...

[* Italian for Latin "mangia la polenta e bevi l'acqua, alza la gamba..."]

 

[Craig4]

Hans,
- OK. I'll start with the first one.
- I'll be back.

This post is just proof that you don't know what you are talking about. You have not been studying the Shroud. You never bothered to educate yourself about AMS.

Copy and paste does not an expert make. I question your integrity.

 

[John Jones]

So you mean last year then?

Oh, That's good!