What is /his/'s stance on the shroud of Turin? How did they have knowledge of photograph chemistry in the medieval ages?
It's a fucking hoax
>>468813
It's been radiocarbon dated to medieval times by multiple independent labs.
I very much doubt that it was actually the burial shroud of Jesus.
>tfw it's a photographic copy of the real mccoy
Well, it's really SHROUDED in mystery.
>>468820
Jesus died way before the medieval times. Its a very old hoax but a hoax nonetheless.
>>468915
It does not matter whether it's a medieval hoax. The real issue is how people in medieval times were able to produce this image when there is no recorded knowledge of the necessary chemistry.
>>469039
The real issue is how dinosaurs were able to produce this when there is no recorded knowledge of the necessary chemistry.
>>468900
>>468900
get out of here carlos!
>>469047
but that looks like a mammal
just sayin
https://www.youtube.com/user/shroudencounter/videos
>inb4 watching Youtube videos proves anything
This guy has made me doubt the carbon dating. They seemed to have done everything wrong by cutting from a piece that was resown at some earlier time and the samples were all taken from one spot instead of multiple spots like the Vatican wanted them to do. The amount of times the cloth has been handled (including the fire) means it's probably impossible to get an accurate date. It's a shame we'll probably never get another chance.
>>468820
Common myth. One lab wanted to debunk it by intentionally taking a small part of the cloth that was not very old and had been sewn into the original after a fire. The actual thing is 2000 years old, matches the shroud of manopello perfectly and contains traces of unique plants that only grow in the area of Christ's death.
>>469830
Common myth. There's a massive thread on the International Skeptics forum that deals with this. Can't post the link as I'm on my phone.
>>469851
Mark Anderson, who was working for McCrone, analyzed the Shroud samples. In his book Ray Rogers states that Anderson, who was McCrone's Raman microscopy expert, observed that the samples acted as organic material when he subjected them to the laser, but McCrone refused to accept the observation for he wanted the conclusion that the image was painted with hematite. In his open letter to journalists Daniel R. Porter states that McCrone suppressed the results of Anderson.
Sounds like credible people.
>>469851
>Roberto Gottardo of the diocese of Turin stated that for the first time ever they had released high definition images of the shroud that can be used on tablet computers and can be magnified to show details not visible to the naked eye.
>In 2013, new peer-reviewed articles were published in favor of the hypothesis that the Turin shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. One followed a "Minimal Facts approach" to determine which hypothesis relating to the image formation process "is the most likely".Another analysed the wounds seemingly evident on the image in the shroud and compared them to the wounds which the gospels state were inflicted on Jesus. Another regression analysis by Riani et al. concluded that the validity of the 1988 radiocarbon dating test is questionable.
>In 2013, Giulio Fanti performed new dating studies on fragments obtained from the shroud. He performed three different tests including spectroscopy (absorption of light of different colours). The date range from these tests date the shroud between 300 BC and 400 AD.
>In 2015, Italian researchers published a new study in Scientific Reports. After sequencing some DNA of pollen and dust found on the shroud, they confirmed that many people from many different places came in contact with the shroud. According to the scientists, "such diversity does not exclude a Medieval origin in Europe but it would be also compatible with the historic path followed by the Turin Shroud during its presumed journey from the Near East. Furthermore, the results raise the possibility of an Indian manufacture of the linen cloth."
Remember anon, dinosaurs are 347 quadrillion years old and we know their color and diet from bones.
>>469901
but we dont know their color, we just learned they had feathers instead of just skin/scales
>>469901
no you retard, we know about their diet from fossilized poop
The face should be distorted if it actually were laying over Jesus' face.
Of course, the image could've been from some special God power of resurrection...?
>>469924
Found the links
http://www.internationalskeptics com/forums/showthread.php?t=226761
http://www.internationalskeptics com/forums/showthread.php?t=264041
http://www.internationalskeptics com/forums/showthread.php?t=295519
http://www.internationalskeptics com/forums/showthread.php?t=299015
