Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

[pgwenthold]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also. .

Why? They are very, very different things. "Near invisible" in the visible region of the spectrum can, in principle, be accomplished by using your eyes to see that there is no difference.

However, the banding cannot be seen with your eyes and requires "looking" in other regions of the electromagnetic spectrum. The ones you claim to have done the banding didn't even KNOW there is such a thing as an electromagnetic spectrum, or that there is a visible and non-visible region, much less being able to make sure it is invisible to the non-visible region.

Therefore, it couldn't be deliberate. So the only possibility is that it is random? They randomly put in a patch so to not disrupt the banding? It's lunacy. Complete and utter lunacy.

 

[Belz...]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also.

And if they could fly, they could get to America.

 

[Belz...]

- You brought up other sub-issues. I'll try to deal with them next unless you direct me otherwise.

There are no sub-issues, and you've lost on the main issue. Time to act like an adult and admit it.

 

[Monza]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also. But so far,
2. Does sound like there would be nothing deliberate about it -- which seems to obviate John's suggestion.

- I just asked John if he has a comeback...
- You brought up other sub-issues. I'll try to deal with them next unless you direct me otherwise.

Just to bring this full circle, our recent conversation started by discussing the purpose of the C14 testing. You admit that this test was performed on a sample in order to determine the age of the shroud. There is no evidence that the sample was not representative of the shroud as a whole. In fact, the evidence indicates that the sample area was indeed part of the original weave of the shroud. The three independent labs measured the age of the sample to be ~1260-1390 AD, ergo the shroud linen was made ~1260-1390 AD. Do you agree with this logic?

 

[Giordano]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also. But so far,
2. Does sound like there would be nothing deliberate about it -- which seems to obviate John's suggestion.

- I just asked John if he has a comeback...
- You brought up other sub-issues. I'll try to deal with them next unless you direct me otherwise.

1. The banding would not have been visible to these hypothetical repairers- it is visible under UV light.

2. There is no known way to repair a cloth without interrupting this invisible banding pattern.

3. Even an "invisible repair" or near invisible repair would need to be made from the same cloth as the Shroud and would yield the same date as the Shroud itself.

4. There are very crude repairs to far more important parts of the Shroud, so there is no reason one would make an "invisible" repair to this peripheral, unimportant portion.


5. There is NO evidence of any kind of such a repair, despite the Shroud having been looked at carefully at the microscopic level.

I will not be back, I hope.

 

[aleCcowaN]

True, but no more viable.

At least it looks like he's calling more for plain miracles and not asking the laws of physics to bend over backward. Jabba is capable of almost anything to get that dirty rug to pass as a one century artefact simply the way it is -and the stains to be blood, and a very long etcetera- the same way he feigns there he is having a debate here by logging in four times a week and repeating the same short nonsense just to add "I'll be back". To be clear, Jabba's departs from a shroud's magical moment and he distorts everything intentionally just to get that piece as having aged in normal conditions during almost 2,000 years.

 

[Giordano]

And if they could fly, they could get to America.

Gee, that was almost my exact response. Except I am in America and I was going to use the example of getting to London.

 

[Monza]

I liike that he claims the ¹⁴C date was skewed by in influx of neutrons from the corpse that converted ¹⁴N to ¹⁴C. Linen is essentially cellulose or CHO_(n) where is a large integer. Would there have been enough nitrogen in the fabric to create the ¹⁴C by neutron activation of ¹⁴N? Is there any evidence that this elevated neutron flux existed? Why are no other elements on the shroud transmutated?

"The dating laboratories, not realizing that the shroud had been through a neutron absorption event, would have misinterpreted their result by assuming the wrong C14 decay curve."

Ha ha, silly laboratories! How did they miss this?!

 

[Garrette]

At least it looks like he's calling more for plain miracles and not asking the laws of physics to bend over backward. Jabba is capable of almost anything to get that dirty rug to pass as a one century artefact simply the way it is -and the stains to be blood, and a very long etcetera- the same way he feigns there he is having a debate here by logging in four times a week and repeating the same short nonsense just to add "I'll be back". To be clear, Jabba's departs from a shroud's magical moment and he distorts everything intentionally just to get that piece as having aged in normal conditions during almost 2,000 years.

I want to agree (with your assessment of the author over there), but I can't. He's doing the same thing as Jabba regardless if he is dressing it better.

Believer: Here's our story of how the Shroud is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus.

Science and all Historical Evidence: Here's proof otherwise.

Believer: Here's our modified story to pretend to account for the counter-evidence.


The only difference is that the author over there is the creator of the lies and Jabba is merely the consumer.

 

[aleCcowaN]

I want to agree (with your assessment of the author over there), but I can't. He's doing the same thing as Jabba regardless if he is dressing it better.

Believer: Here's our story of how the Shroud is the authentic burial cloth of Jesus.

Science and all Historical Evidence: Here's proof otherwise.

Believer: Here's our modified story to pretend to account for the counter-evidence.


The only difference is that the author over there is the creator of the lies and Jabba is merely the consumer.

I understand what you say, the motivation is the same and some ethical aspects are alike. But the aesthetics of it is very different. At least Rucker is trying to press the old style gear lever and set reverse before starting to write backwards. Jabba's doesn't care, he simply smack the lever in reverse when the car is going forward at 50 mph and he enjoys the sounds of "the ongoing debate" that has him as it centre. A 3 year-old ethics. Rucker, in all his mistakes, is much more mature.

 

[Garrette]

Fair enough.

 

[MRC_Hans]

I liike that he claims the ¹⁴C date was skewed by in influx of neutrons from the corpse that converted ¹⁴N to ¹⁴C. Linen is essentially cellulose or CHO_(n) where is a large integer. Would there have been enough nitrogen in the fabric to create the ¹⁴C by neutron activation of ¹⁴N? Is there any evidence that this elevated neutron flux existed? Why are no other elements on the shroud transmutated?

Doesn't matter. This is an ad hoc hypothesis and a supernatural one. He invokes magic to explain away physical evidence.

If you invoke magic, anything goes.

Hans

 

[MRC_Hans]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also.

Nonsense. That's like saying that if birds can fly, so can pigs.

First of all, the only known method of near-invisivbe patch is later then the 14th century and it uses material from the original fabric. Thus, it would not have been made in the 14th century, and anyway, it would not affect the C14 dating.

Secondly, the banding phenomenon is not visible to the unaided eye, so nobody could have duplicated it in the 14th century.

Yeah, you'll be back.


Hans

 

[John Jones]

Doesn't matter. This is an ad hoc hypothesis and a supernatural one. He invokes magic to explain away physical evidence.

If you invoke magic, anything goes.

Hans

Well yes, but I like a good magic act. This ain't good.

 

[abaddon]

Jabba, will ignore this.

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also. But so far,

Nope. You are trying to pretend that medieval repairers had the technology to read and match UV and IR bands and furthermore replicate them. That is two claims devoid of any evidence whatsoever.

2. Does sound like there would be nothing deliberate about it -- which seems to obviate John's suggestion.

Well, that is just a cynical tactic. You do not identify "john", nor what his suggestion might be, nor your rebuttal to said "john's" suggestion.

Is it "John Doe"? You don't say. What post does it relate to? You don't say. Which post does it relate to? You don't say. Which poster does it relate to? You don't identify that either. This is either a ploy, or a symptom, or maybe something else. In any event, it is once again a fundamentally dishonest argument.

- I just asked John if he has a comeback...

Does Jebus Doe have an equivalent comeback?

- You brought up other sub-issues.

Now you are engangeing in a traditional Gish Gallop. Please stop and deal with the issues on the table.

I'll try to deal with them next unless you direct me otherwise.

Except you won't. Past history indicates that you never do, you simply glom onto responses which allow you to avoid the issues raised. This is not an attack, you have been doing it for 4 years as this thread attests.

 

[aleCcowaN]

Well yes, but I like a good magic act. This ain't good.

I agree. Jabba doesn't even try to concoct a reasonable story like others do. His is sloppy, at best.

 

[Rincewind]

1. The banding would not have been visible to these hypothetical repairers- it is visible under UV light.

2. There is no known way to repair a cloth without interrupting this invisible banding pattern.

[snipped]

So they had UV equipment way back then, huh?

Who knew?

 

[John Jones]

Monza,
1. It's just saying that if repairers could actually get away with near-invisible repair otherwise, they could probably get away with it re the banding also. But so far,
2. Does sound like there would be nothing deliberate about it -- which seems to obviate John's suggestion.

- I just asked John if he has a comeback...
- You brought up other sub-issues. I'll try to deal with them next unless you direct me otherwise.

Either cite me or some other John, or understand why people consider you a frequent liar so readily

I'm tired of all the nefarium.

 

[slyjoe]

Even if, IF the shroud was some sort of bloodstained 'imprint' of a man crucified in the 1st century,
how do we then connect it to the historical Jesus?

In this very thread (or the one before it), when everyone was asking to just provide evidence of the age, Jabba's argument was to prove that it was the shroud of Jesus and THAT meant it was 2000 years old.

As you have probably surmised, that is completely ass backwards.

And welcome to the quagmire that is the shroud of turin thread.

 

[Kid Eager]

I believe it's time for sub issue 1.1.3.

So far we have agreed that chicken live on brains, are dinosaurs in skinny suits, eat dark matter, and cause El Niño. They also pronounce "potato" incorrectly.

I will graciously ignore some of the twaddle in response to my prior posts, because that is an integral part of my debating method.

Without and further ado, to point 1.1.3. Which I will type slowly so that Slow posters can keep up.

The more cautious amongst you may have noticed that you rarely see fire engines, clowns, and earthworms in close company. Be that as it may, the rabbits are know to prefer euchre and this is the connection to artificial insemination of geese. Geese have beaks too, just like elephants and chickens. Consider the implications. Double dissolution. You put your left hand in, you put your left hand out, you're right back where you started from. Stupid person.

ETA - I'll be back