|
Post by Swampy on Oct 21, 2014 1:44:35 GMT -5
Carbon 14 tests put it to the 12th century, which would have meant it was NOT from the time of Christ, but a new study disputes that, saying it really is from the time of Christ.
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Oct 28, 2014 19:49:44 GMT -5
The carbon dating was done on a patch that was used in the 12th century to repair the shroud , it must be noted that the Catholic Church makes no claim on the shroud one way or the other .
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Oct 28, 2014 20:42:29 GMT -5
The carbon dating was done on a patch that was used in the 12th century to repair the shroud , it must be noted that the Catholic Church makes no claim on the shroud one way or the other . Hence the controversy - was it the patch, or was it part of the original shroud?
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Oct 28, 2014 21:03:36 GMT -5
The shroud is made of wool the patch was made of cotton .
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Oct 28, 2014 22:39:19 GMT -5
I'll keep an eye on the controversy.
|
|
|
Post by dry on Nov 11, 2014 19:21:22 GMT -5
The carbon dating was done on a patch that was used in the 12th century to repair the shroud , it must be noted that the Catholic Church makes no claim on the shroud one way or the other . en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_TurinAccording to that reference, the repair patch theory is not true. Was it invented by some dishonest priest to keep the shroud legend alive?
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Nov 17, 2014 17:53:27 GMT -5
Perhaps dry can enlighten us on just how the image was transpose to the shroud since this is the real question concerning the shroud and not whose image it is .
|
|
|
Post by dry on Nov 22, 2014 13:54:36 GMT -5
Perhaps dry can enlighten us on just how the image was transpose to the shroud since this is the real question concerning the shroud and not whose image it is . Why has no one dared to carry out scientific studies on that point? (Because the shroud is alleged to be so holy? Therefore, no one will study the matter?) My suggestion is, the image was created by a simple crayon, and drawn by a skillful portrait artist. Dr. Y
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Nov 22, 2014 22:22:05 GMT -5
I would have thought you might have come with something more profound , a crayon a portrait artist , what are you on or what do you need to get back on .
|
|
|
Post by dry on Nov 24, 2014 1:02:22 GMT -5
I would have thought you might have come with something more profound , a crayon a portrait artist , what are you on or what do you need to get back on . To the best of my knowledge, the Shroud of Turin is a hoax.
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Nov 24, 2014 10:52:25 GMT -5
Hoax or not HOW was it done ? the thing has been around hundreds of years and can only be seen by special lighting .
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Nov 24, 2014 12:06:35 GMT -5
Hoax or not HOW was it done ? the thing has been around hundreds of years and can only be seen by special lighting . Good question.
|
|
|
Post by dry on Nov 24, 2014 22:57:58 GMT -5
Hoax or not HOW was it done ? the thing has been around hundreds of years and can only be seen by special lighting . Good question. There was there no special lighting several hundreds of years ago. Only sunlight, candles, and such.
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Nov 25, 2014 0:12:42 GMT -5
There was there no special lighting several hundreds of years ago. Only sunlight, candles, and such. So how was it done, then?
|
|
|
Post by dry on Nov 25, 2014 8:01:29 GMT -5
There was there no special lighting several hundreds of years ago. Only sunlight, candles, and such. So how was it done, then? Hornet says: "the thing has been around hundreds of years and can only be seen by special lighting". And there was there no special lighting hundreds of years ago. The figure on the Shroud only can be seen with modern special techno lighting. So the Shroud must be a relatively modern hoax.
|
|