Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

[Aepervius]

- From http://shroud.com/nature.htm
- The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Hans,
- It appears to me that the authors were not careful about their wording. The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular patch they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud.

Are you that an ignorant ? or are you doing this intentionally ?

When you take a sample, and check as they did it was not a patch, the conclusion is applicable to the rest of the cloth.


YOU pretend there is patch, patch that nobody else is seeing. But the point is that for them absentia patch the SAMPLE is representative of the WHOLE.

 

[John Jones]

I wonder who is counseling Jabba on his claims abut the ¹⁴C samples not being adequate to the task, and about the three labs being too emotional to do the job right, but all 3 getting it wrong by about the same amount?

Jabba's clearly not knowledgeable about the processes involved, so I figure someone is feeding this to him.

 

[Aepervius]

I wonder who is counseling Jabba on his claims abut the ¹⁴C samples not being adequate to the task, and about the three labs being too emotional to do the job right, but all 3 getting it wrong by about the same amount?

Jabba's clearly not knowledgeable about the processes involved, so I figure someone is feeding this to him.

No. I figure he is simply repeating his old post or just copy pasting from a ready list. He might have had the list fed to him, and might be unable(due to lack of knowledge or capacity) to make real new research, but I doubt somebody is feeding him due to the huge repetition i see.

Sometimes though, i wonder if it is an attempt at the longest trolling in a thread.

 

[abaddon]

That's the most insane non sequitur I've seen in a long time.

Yeah, right.

I will assume that you meant something you never said.

LOLWUT?

WTF is this? God of the gaps on speed?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hans,

- Since you said that emotionality is irrelevant, I'll assume that you accept that there was a lot of emotionality involved in the 10 years leading up to the carbon dating itself...

No. You do not assume that. I have made no commitment what so ever on what emotionality there was.

- My first sub-claim is that none of the labs would have accepted the particular sample as being sufficient, and appropriate, for determining the age of the shroud, had dating the shroud not been such a prize.

That is a totally absurd claim. If there was a controverse in advance, and knowing that there would certainly be controversy afterwards, no matter what the result, labs would certainly have been very anxious to assure that not a finger could be put on their results. All else would be insane.

If you know that all your competitors, and at least halv the interest groups, plus, presumably, the world at large would be very upset at your result, the last thing you would do is to work on unacceptable samples.

In conclusion, IF there was such a controversy, it would only spur the labs to do their VERY BEST.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

- From http://shroud.com/nature.htm
- The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Hans,
- It appears to me that the authors were not careful about their wording. The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular patch they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud.

Wrong. It means that they imply that they found the samples to be representative of the whole shroud. Otherwise they would have included a wording like "provided the tested samples are representative". Jabba, I have been doing this sort of things for a living for several decades. Trust me, no professional would omit such a clause, unless they were absolutely confident that the samples were representative.

ETA:

The strip came from a single site on the main body of the shroud away from any patches or charred areas.

(From your link). If you would actuallt read (and understand) the text you link to, you would realice that there is NO problem what so ever with the testing.

Again, Jabba, all your arguments are uninformed quesswork. You have no evidence. I suggest you give up on the C14 test.

Hans

 

[abaddon]

I wonder who is counseling Jabba on his claims abut the ¹⁴C samples not being adequate to the task, and about the three labs being too emotional to do the job right, but all 3 getting it wrong by about the same amount?

Jabba's clearly not knowledgeable about the processes involved, so I figure someone is feeding this to him.

Probably, we are now "beyond the event horizon of the formless"

Apparently, according to Jabba, scientists skip around their labs and fake results willy-nilly, and furthermore collude to make sure their results agree.

On top of that, they must perforce agree which false C14 date they will settle upon and must sabotage their equipment to reach said date.

Because they are emotional.

What a weasel worded expression. All humans, by nature, are emotional. That's exactly why the scientific method was developed, to eliminate that.
That's also why we know that the CIQ is a glorified tablecloth. It ain't no different than the ducks on the wall in Hilda Ogden's sitting room. Or a three dollar bill. Or a 33 cent coin. You don't believe any of those, do you?

Well, perhaps you do.

 

[Slowvehicle]

- From http://shroud.com/nature.htm
- The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Hans,
- It appears to me that the authors were not careful about their wording. The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular patch they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud.

Dear Mr. Savage:

this is one of those places where you could save yourself some embarrassment by reading, insrtead of rudely ignoring, my posts.

Here is relevant material:

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/turin_shroud_still_a_fake/

...So once again, attacks on the accuracy of the radiocarbon testing have been discredited...

...There is no mass spectrometry evidence that the C14 sample from the Shroud of Turin comes from a ‘medieval invisible mending.’...

________

 

[John Jones]

Dear Mr. Savage:

this is one of those palces where you could save yourself some embarrassment by reading, insrtead of rudely ignoring, my posts.

Here is relevant material:

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blog..._still_a_fake/




________

I get a 404 error on that link

 

[Slowvehicle]

I get a 404 error on that link

TY!

...try this:

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/turin_shroud_still_a_fake/

 

[sackett]

A long time ago, in a thread far away, Jabba opined that because the three labs all got such similar results, it "should have made you guys suspicious." I think I'm recalling his exact words, since they struck me as so very, very

"asinine" will get me in trouble with the Mods (all peace and blessings be upon them, may all their Toyota technicals be fully fueled and armed, selah, amen), so I won't say that.

But note the reasoning involved: Trebly certain confirmation of the Shred's medieval date is cause for doubt -- to a believer, even proof of fraud!

Oh well, Jabba has me on Ignore, and for good reason: he's afraid of me.

 

[SezMe]

Some new DNA results:

A group of Italian researchers have found that the 14-foot-long garment -- believed by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, even though science has proven that's not the case -- contains DNA from plants found all over Earth.

New results for Jabba to spin away.

 

[Craig4]

- From http://shroud.com/nature.htm
- The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Hans,
- It appears to me that the authors were not careful about their wording. The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular patch they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud.

Why did you bring this up? There is no evidence of a patch where the sample was taken.

 

[Craig4]

I wonder who is counseling Jabba on his claims abut the ¹⁴C samples not being adequate to the task, and about the three labs being too emotional to do the job right, but all 3 getting it wrong by about the same amount?

Jabba's clearly not knowledgeable about the processes involved, so I figure someone is feeding this to him.

I think he's just surfing the pro Shroud websites and copy and pasting the nonsense they spew. Most of this I think I've seen looking at other Shroud believer stuff. I think that's why his knowledge of the Shroud is only copy and paste deep. He's just quote mining to find someone, no matter how out there who wrote something to support his conclusion. I would think that if was getting fed by a live person he'd be at least a bit more conversant in his topics.

 

[Jabba]

- From http://shroud.com/nature.htm
- The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.

Hans,
- It appears to me that the authors were not careful about their wording. The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular patch they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud.

Hans,
- Oops! I really screwed up! The Devil must have made me do it!
- I used the absolute wrong word above. I should have said "sample" rather than "patch." "Patch" only confused the issue. I should have said, "The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular sample they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud."
- Would you agree with that statement?

 

[slyjoe]

More dishonesty.

 

[John Jones]

I think he's just surfing the pro Shroud websites and copy and pasting the nonsense they spew. Most of this I think I've seen looking at other Shroud believer stuff. I think that's why his knowledge of the Shroud is only copy and paste deep. He's just quote mining to find someone, no matter how out there who wrote something to support his conclusion. I would think that if was getting fed by a live person he'd be at least a bit more conversant in his topics.

You're right. I was thinking about Hugh Farey, and Jabba's claim to be conversing with him vial email on this subject.

I presume such interlocution has ceased, because Jabba's arguments have even less verisimilitude than they did when Hugh Farey was active here (that's not intended as a reflection on Mr Farey).

 

[Slowvehicle]

Hans,
- Oops! I really screwed up! The Devil must have made me do it!
- I used the absolute wrong word above. I should have said "sample" rather than "patch." "Patch" only confused the issue. I should have said, "The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular sample they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud."
- Would you agree with that statement?

Dear Mr. Savage:

Upon what do you base your desperate hope that the tested area was not representative of the CIQ in general?

Why do you continue to ignore the following source?

...So once again, attacks on the accuracy of the radiocarbon testing have been discredited...

...There is no mass spectrometry evidence that the C14 sample from the Shroud of Turin comes from a ‘medieval invisible mending.’...

http://www.centerforinquiry.net/blogs/entry/turin_shroud_still_a_fake/


________

 

[John Jones]

Hans,
- Oops! I really screwed up! The Devil must have made me do it!
- I used the absolute wrong word above. I should have said "sample" rather than "patch." "Patch" only confused the issue. I should have said, "The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular sample they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud."
- Would you agree with that statement?

Nobody with any integrity is going to agree with your years of dissimulation. You long ago wasted any credibility you may have had. Shame on you for spending your waning years in such a manner.

 

[Craig4]

Hans,
- Oops! I really screwed up! The Devil must have made me do it!
- I used the absolute wrong word above. I should have said "sample" rather than "patch." "Patch" only confused the issue. I should have said, "The 95% confidence of their dating was for the particular sample they studied -- it was not for the the linen of the shroud."
- Would you agree with that statement?

A distinction without a difference since there is no sign of repairs or patches at the site where the sample was taken.