Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

Status
Not open for further replies.
John Jones said:
I didn't see it that way. It struck me as an attempt to simultaneously defend STURP, and distance STURP from Ray Rogers' 2005 ridiculous claims about vanillin dating.
Click to expand...

Weren't the conclusions of Heimburger -page 19- along the lines of what I said?

[By the way, this kind of jabbaless conversations are way more interesting]
 
aleCcowaN said:
Weren't the conclusions of Heimburger -page 19- along the lines of what I said?

[By the way, this kind of jabbaless conversations are way more interesting]
Click to expand...


I'll go back and read Heimburger on page 19 again.

And yes. It's more more interesting and informative than any so-called Truly Effective Debate[TM]
 
Mojo said:
How about 700 year-old fabric?
Click to expand...

Actually, a first-order search of the literature does not produce any record of anyone other than Rogers using VNP to date fabric, or Rogers using it to date fabric other than the CIQ (for sufficiently "attempt to discredit the 14C results" values of "date").
 
Last edited:
Mojo said:
How about 700 year-old fabric?
Click to expand...

Not to brag on my school, but the University of Leicester has a prestigious archeology program. I have to think that if anyone used this to date artifacts there would be something in their library. I looked in physical holdings in addition to what's online and there's just nothing there. The only thing I could find about vanillin decay dating relates to the Shroud. Unless they are publishing in way outside the mainstream journals, the Shroud is the only artifact ever dated in this way.
 
Jabba has just been looking at part II of the thread, so don't be surprised if there's another reset in the near future.
 
aleCcowaN said:
But vanillin degradation might be a legitimate technique using the proper detection method, mightn't it?
Click to expand...

Funnilly it is not vanillin degradation, but if I understand the article linked before lignin degradation , and the wiesner test finding the coniferaldehyde C-C=C-C=O part and giving a coloration red. Vanillin is actually a contaminant you do not want because it break down the test.

That is if i understood the text correctly, and if the chemical basis of what is cited is correct.

ETA: and the usage of sulfur candle (or even burning sulfur directly) used to chase off vermine , as you would with a precious artifact, would actually break down the test mentionned. But whatever. Except shroudy i see nobody using something as imprecise so influenced by factor you know nothing about, temperature, acidity, presence of sulfur oxydes, to make a dating method.

A clock which can be completely stopped at certain pH give you no good information.
 
Last edited:
Thank you John Jones, Aepervius, Slowvehicle and the rest of you for patiently providing me with a crash course of sindonology so I can somewhat catch up with years of discussion here arriving to the inevitable conclusion the shroud is a forgery. I can see now that there's sort of law that says that the lengths the advocates of a wacky notion are willing to go distorting science and logic to sustain their beliefs are directly proportional to the preposterousness of their advocacies. In the case of the shroud they seem to have monopolized the appeal to authority: you have to believe certain myths because the religious authority says to you "it's the truth", you have to believe the shroud is or may be authentic because a group of "scientist" say yo to do so. And they are allowed to do and say anything to that effect, because for starters that's why they were invested as authorities. So, in the jabba-way, it all boils down to a duel like those in the Japanese painted-cardboard TV-series with a good samurai-like robot and a bad samurai-like robot struggling with force rays that emerge from their robotic hands for the strongest to win.

It's safe to say the shroud is a fake but any utter re-confirmation of that will have to wait because there's no interest in the truth. The shroud is like the Tower of Pisa which attractive comes because it leans, leans but it will never fall. Any attempt to stabilize the tower causes the international tourism to lost interest and $$$$ start to shrink. In a similar way a debunked shroud means nobody will be longer interested in it and they probably flock to what might be the blood of Saint Gennaro which still is surrounded by a veal of mystic mystery.
 
aleCcowaN said:
Thank you John Jones, Aepervius, Slowvehicle and the rest of you for patiently providing me with a crash course of sindonology so I can somewhat catch up with years of discussion here arriving to the inevitable conclusion the shroud is a forgery.
Click to expand...

Well, it boosts self-esteem when you remember that several times in your life you've changed your mind on stuff you believed in, supernatural or otherwise, because reality just didn't agree with you. I used to think the Shroud was a big mystery until I decided to read up. I used to think I could bust clouds until I noticed the times it didn't work (that is, most of the time). I used to think relativity was bunk until I looked into it. Etc.
 
Carbon Dating Doubts/Emotionality

Hans,
- I have numerous haystacks in which to find my needles, so this will take even longer than usual -- but the following might be a good place to start.
- From http://www.internationalskeptics.co...5&highlight=carbon+dating+doubts#post10512125
- From http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/stlschneiderpaper.pdf, a 2013 article by
Raymond J. Schneider: The Flawed Carbon Dating Process
The problem with the samples did not originate with the carbon labs however. William Meachum had warned in a submission to Archbishop
Ballestrero: "It is a very serious error indeed to proceed with C14 dating
on the assumption that it is an infallible method." [2] A protocol had been
recommended by the Turin conference held in September 1986. It was advanced
as a recommendation and not a binding agreement. None the less the
recommendations involved more than three labs, a mix of both counter labs
and AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) labs, and most importantly samples
from multiple sites. The decision to limit the dating to three labs, using
only the AMS method and restricting the sampling to a single highly
contaminated site were all outcomes determined by a politicized and highly
bureaucratic process of Byzantine proportions. Mix in a lot of backbiting
and intrigue as thoroughly documented by Harry Gove [3] and William Meacham
[4] and you have a recipe for disaster.
 
aleCcowaN said:
Thank you John Jones, Aepervius, Slowvehicle and the rest of you for patiently providing me with a crash course of sindonology so I can somewhat catch up with years of discussion here arriving to the inevitable conclusion the shroud is a forgery. I can see now that there's sort of law that says that the lengths the advocates of a wacky notion are willing to go distorting science and logic to sustain their beliefs are directly proportional to the preposterousness of their advocacies. In the case of the shroud they seem to have monopolized the appeal to authority: you have to believe certain myths because the religious authority says to you "it's the truth", you have to believe the shroud is or may be authentic because a group of "scientist" say yo to do so. And they are allowed to do and say anything to that effect, because for starters that's why they were invested as authorities. So, in the jabba-way, it all boils down to a duel like those in the Japanese painted-cardboard TV-series with a good samurai-like robot and a bad samurai-like robot struggling with force rays that emerge from their robotic hands for the strongest to win.


It's safe to say the shroud is a fake
but any utter re-confirmation of that will have to wait because there's no interest in the truth. The shroud is like the Tower of Pisa which attractive comes because it leans, leans but it will never fall. Any attempt to stabilize the tower causes the international tourism to lost interest and $$$$ start to shrink. In a similar way a debunked shroud means nobody will be longer interested in it and they probably flock to what might be the blood of Saint Gennaro which still is surrounded by a veal of mystic mystery.
Click to expand...

I, personally, try not to use the term, "fake", for the CIQ. It is, after all, an actual artifact; a thing that exists. It is not the "True ShroudTM"; it is a 700-year-old-piece of linen with an artwork on it.
 
Jabba said:
Hans,
- I have numerous haystacks in which to find my needles, so this will take even longer than usual -- but the following might be a good place to start.
- From http://www.internationalskeptics.co...5&highlight=carbon+dating+doubts#post10512125
- From http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/stlschneiderpaper.pdf, a 2013 article by
Raymond J. Schneider: The Flawed Carbon Dating Process
The problem with the samples did not originate with the carbon labs however. William Meachum had warned in a submission to Archbishop
Ballestrero: "It is a very serious error indeed to proceed with C14 dating
on the assumption that it is an infallible method." [2] A protocol had been
recommended by the Turin conference held in September 1986. It was advanced
as a recommendation and not a binding agreement. None the less the
recommendations involved more than three labs, a mix of both counter labs
and AMS (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry) labs, and most importantly samples
from multiple sites. The decision to limit the dating to three labs, using
only the AMS method and restricting the sampling to a single highly
contaminated site were all outcomes determined by a politicized and highly
bureaucratic process of Byzantine proportions. Mix in a lot of backbiting
and intrigue as thoroughly documented by Harry Gove [3] and William Meacham
[4] and you have a recipe for disaster.
Click to expand...

:sdl::sdl::sdl::dl::sdl::sdl::sdl:
 
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