Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

[Slowvehicle]

Yet we keep posting and, as Jabba states, giving him enjoyment. Why?

Does the motivation for this post extend beyond your own egocentric needs?

 

[Craig4]

- This is something I'm about to send to Dan Porter. I just want to make sure that my description of your consensus opinion about the implications of banding upon the claim that there has been significant repair on the sample is correct and fair.

I’m debating the Shroud with the skeptics at http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=299015. If you haven’t noticed me on Dan’s blog before, I’ve been doing this for a long time (over 3 years). We’re now on our 4th sub-thread, and ‘going strong’ (17,000 replies, and 788,000 visits altogether) – though, getting nowhere…
No one I’ve told about my hobby can understand my persistence -- and really, neither can I -- but, for some reason, I’m enjoying myself, and still have hopes. Maybe it has something to do with trying to love my enemies… I don’t know.
But then, my memory is easing down that slippery slope, and I could use a lot of help…

I’m trying to address one sub-sub-etc-issue at a time (there must be thousands of them) with the skeptics, and feel like I’m finally getting somewhere -- very slowly. I’ve done a lot of reading and studying about the shroud over the past 35 years, but my memory for specifics has never been that good (I can’t tell a joke), and as my memory of generalities gets worse, so does my memory for specifics, only worse.
But mostly, I haven’t done a good job of keeping track of citations. There’s more to this story, but I’ll spare you the details and just say that I’m looking for some needles in a lot of haystacks -- and need some help from people who have kept better track of the same, and more, needles. This blog seems full of such people, and if I can just interest you guys in my plight, I’m sure that I can get a lot of help -- and gain some real speed and substance when answering the skeptics.
Without further ado, here’s my first question: my opponents claim that the banding proves that there has been no significant repair on the sample. What’s our best argument(s) otherwise?

Odd that I see no mention of the specific issue of the invisible or almost invisible patch. Why not just ask him about that specific issue?

I take exception to your characterization of sub issues. Right now the only thing that really matters is how old the cloth is. If you can't date the artifact nothing else matters.

 

[Craig4]

Yet we keep posting and, as Jabba states, giving him enjoyment. Why?

I suspect that he doesn't get much enjoyment. More likely, as long as the conversation is going on he doesn't have to face an awful truth.

 

[Maurice Ledifficile]

It is quite telling that he refers to the thread as going well, based on how many pages it's been going on...

 

[Giordano]

I first heard it told about being in prison, in the early '70s.

Oddly I think it more likely that my Aunt was in prison than that she ever saw a Monty Python show.

But in fact I think she heard it at work. Interesting how jokes get around. I think Asimov once wrote a short story suggesting that they originated as a psychology experiment by extraterrestrials.

 

[Kid Eager]

I have a theory.

 

[Rincewind]

I have a theory.

About shrouds or dinosaurs?

 

[Filippo Lippi]

How many times has Jabba sent a billet-doux to Dan Porter? Two? Three? More? I can't decide whether its principle intent is sucking up to Dan or to push buttons over here and increase the "strength" of the thread.

 

[Kid Eager]

I have a theory.

About shrouds or dinosaurs?

Funny you should ask. My comprehensive theory covers both, as well as why bicycles stay upright, where the dark matter is hiding, and integrates with the U.K. Highway Code.

It might take me a while to lay it all out, so I'd like to do it bit by bit.

I'll be back.

 

[Filippo Lippi]

Would it help to send an email to someone who writes a blog? You could ask them to send reinforcements if your oft-repeated arguments start wearing thin

 

[wea]

My comprehensive theory covers both, as well as why bicycles stay upright, where the dark matter is hiding, and integrates with the U.K. Highway Code.

don't you know that "Most good ideas don't work."?
...
or is it "Most bad ideas don't work." ? I'll be back

 

[Mojo]

Funny you should ask. My comprehensive theory covers both, as well as why bicycles stay upright, where the dark matter is hiding, and integrates with the U.K. Highway Code.

It might take me a while to lay it all out, so I'd like to do it bit by bit.

I'll be back.

Is it to do with the interchanging of atoms with their riders?

 

[catsmate]

I have a theory.

...a dancing demon?

No, something isn't right.

 

[Belz...]

I'm having trouble finding the stuff I'm looking for re the implications of banding re the repair hypothesis.

Maybe if you stopped posting here until you find what you're looking for, you might have more time to find it.

 

[Slowvehicle]

don't you know that "Most good ideas don't work."?
...
or is it "Most bad ideas don't work." ? I'll be back

"Most ideas don't work good."

 

[Jabba]

Carbon Dating Doubts/"Invisible Re-weave"

- Here's something I received on Dan's blog.
http://www.cirac.org/shroud/Discussion/MGS-CESS-36-42.htm.

- Whatever, it appears that something was done to the sample that did not obviously affect the continued banding
- A suggestion offered by John Klotz, author of The Coming of the Quantum Christ: If the goal of those that repaired the corner was an invisible repair that they would per force have replicated the banding where necessary.

 

[catsmate]

- Here's something I received on Dan's blog.
<snip>

It's rubbish like all the other suggestions of "invisible" repairs. The section sampled was examined by experts, before the sample was cut, and again some years later when the backing was removed. You've been repeating this crap for three years now without producing any evidence.

There was no patch, the radiocarbon dating was (and is) correct. The shroud is a medieval fabrication.

 

[Belz...]

- Here's something I received on Dan's blog.
http://www.cirac.org/shroud/Discussion/MGS-CESS-36-42.htm.

- Whatever, it appears that something was done to the sample that did not obviously affect the continued banding
- A suggestion offered by John Klotz, author of The Coming of the Quantum Christ: If the goal of those that repaired the corner was an invisible repair that they would per force have replicated the banding where necessary.

Anything you need to maintain your belief, Jabba.

 

[John Jones]

- Here's something I received on Dan's blog.
http://www.cirac.org/shroud/Discussion/MGS-CESS-36-42.htm.

- Whatever, it appears that something was done to the sample that did not obviously affect the continued banding
- A suggestion offered by John Klotz, author of The Coming of the Quantum Christ: If the goal of those that repaired the corner was an invisible repair that they would per force have replicated the banding where necessary.

If this invisible repair was done in medieval times, how were they able to reproduce what shows up under UV light and x-ray fluorescence? They didn't know about such stuff back then.

What you've got here is a claim unsupported by any evidence, just like all the other flapdoodle you keep spouting.

Stop talking garbage.

 

[HighRiser]

don't you know that "Most good ideas don't work."?
...
or is it "Most bad ideas don't work." ? I'll be back

"Most ideas don't work good."

"It's a good thing that most ideas don't work!"

I've looked at the Porter blog several times now, and there doesn't appear to be much in the way of disagreement in the published comments. Contraversy is mentioned only in the context of its own existence, which seems to be rather self-serving in that much of the blog is dedicated to selling books of poorly constructed rhetoric.