Miracle of the Shroud IV - The Phantom Image

[aleCcowaN]

Yrreg springs to mind.

God tamers have common quirks.

 

[abaddon]

God tamers have common quirks.

Like, I dunno, being at a loss when your opponents don't follow the script you thought they would?

 

[aleCcowaN]

Like, I dunno, being at a loss when your opponents don't follow the script you thought they would?

Yes, like if "god" is so tame and submissive, you know, why are "'is creatures" so feisty? They can't get it.

 

[Aepervius]

God tamers have common quirks.

The god wrangler. Broken back god. .

 

[Craig4]

The god wrangler. Broken back god. .

God had sex with Heath Ledger?

 

[aleCcowaN]

God had sex with Heath Ledger?

If the mountain will not come to Heath...

 

[abaddon]

Yes, like if "god" is so tame and submissive, you know, why are "'is creatures" so feisty? They can't get it.

Banter aside, why do gunderscored proponents think they can dictate what said deity may or may not do?

 

[aleCcowaN]

Banter aside, why do gunderscored proponents think they can dictate what said deity may or may not do?

That's above my paygrade.

 

[theprestige]

Agatha,
- You're right. I didn't think it through enough...
- I'll see what I can find out.

Jesus Christ.

This is the same thing you tried on me. I asked you to support a conclusion of your choosing, and you came back with something that totally failed to support your conclusion.

It seems your entire argument for authenticity is based on information you haven't actually checked, that doesn't actually support your argument.

 

[John Jones]

Jesus Christ.

This is the same thing you tried on me. I asked you to support a conclusion of your choosing, and you came back with something that totally failed to support your conclusion.

It seems your entire argument for authenticity is based on information you haven't actually checked, that doesn't actually support your argument.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Jesus Christ.

This is the same thing you tried on me. I asked you to support a conclusion of your choosing, and you came back with something that totally failed to support your conclusion.

It seems your entire argument for authenticity is based on information you haven't actually checked, that doesn't actually support your argument.

Welcome to the thread. I have yet to see Mr. Savage present a source he has actually read, in its entirety; or one that he has understood the parts of which he has read.

Consider the inherently contradictory use his sources make of the presence AND absence of Fe₂O₃...a contradiction he, himself, has not yet apprehended.

 

[Craig4]

Welcome to the thread. I have yet to see Mr. Savage present a source he has actually read, in its entirety; or one that he has understood the parts of which he has read.

Consider the inherently contradictory use his sources make of the presence AND absence of Fe₂O₃...a contradiction he, himself, has not yet apprehended.

Well, when one paints a floor they are best advised to start on the side of the room opposite the door, lest they paint themselves into a corner.

 

[theprestige]

Well, when one paints a floor they are best advised to start on the side of the room opposite the door, lest they paint themselves into a corner.

I think the real question is how jabba got into a room with no door in the first place.

"Magic" seems to be the most likely answer.

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Delete

 

[Nay_Sayer]

Banter aside, why do gunderscored proponents think they can dictate what said deity may or may not do?

It's not like their imaginary friend can say it themselves. Ever seen a kid play with actions figures or dolls and they make all the voices and move em about? It's a lot like that.

 

[Rincewind]

It's not like their imaginary friend can say it themselves. Ever seen a kid play with actions figures or dolls and they make all the voices and move em about? It's a lot like that.

Yes indeed.

It's very difficult for imaginary beings to do anything on their own.

 

[Mojo]

He's replying...

 

[John Jones]

I found this on the internet. It's about Ray Rogers getting in a peer-reviewed scientific journal with a pro-authenticity paper. It is lengthy and it is scathing.

http://llanoestacado.org/freeinquiry/skeptic/shroud/articles/rogers-ta-response.htm

To quote a little of the intro:

The real story in this controversy is not the mistaken age of the Shroud of Turin, but the misjudgment of a science journal editor and the breakdown of its peer review process.

[emphasis in the original]

and:

Ray Rogers is a member of STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project, an organization totally composed of believers in the authenticity of the Shroud) and accepted the authenticity of the Shroud from the very beginning of their work in the middle 1970s. He accepts all the shoddy work that STURP passed off as science two and three decades ago. As is well known, STURP's analyses on image formation, identity of the blood, sticky tape pollen, and history were hopelessly incompetent and unscientific, despite their claims and posturing to be rigorously scientific.

Reply to this, Jabba

 

[aleCcowaN]

He's re-plying?

 

[John Jones]

There's this authenticity-skeptical website if no one else has posted it before.

http://freeinquiry.com/skeptic/shroud