- 08 May 2017 09:29
#14803267
the scientists have not perfected these dating methods, so they always state it within some margin of error. But the shroud should be dated before the date of the crucifixion, because it is not reasonable to think it was made on the day of the crucifixion. You don't believe in any of this anyway, so why do you keep asking questions?
The scientists that studied the Shroud say the man was about 5 feet 11 inches tall. I am not sure what you are talking about. The Shroud itself was 14 feet long that the man was placed on and then covered so there is an image of the front and back of the man on the linen burial shroud.
The Shroud of Turin is a 4.4 X 1.1 m linen cloth bearing the front and back body
images, accompanied by blood images, of what appears to be a crucified man. As it is alleged
to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus, it is a most controversial object. Many of those not
accepting this claim have asserted that it is just a painting, although it is now clear that the
blood images are due to the cloth having been in contact with a wounded human body. A large
body of scientific evidence has now been accumulated on this object and will be reviewed in
some detail, including the question of authenticity. It will be clear that it is not a painting, nor
any of several other recently suggested explanations such as a photograph, although the
mechanism of the formation of the body images remains a mystery. Matters concerning its
conservation will also be briefly touched upon.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/adler.pdf
Besoeker wrote:You stated " the scientific proof of the Shroud of Turin"
And now you are citing an article with a possible margin of 250 years???
Actually, it's ± 250 years.
The mean of which would put it at 30BC. If relevant.
So, not only does that not pinpoint it to the suggested date of the crusifixion, it gives not the slightest clue as to who the victim was.
To quote Ricky Gervais.......
the scientists have not perfected these dating methods, so they always state it within some margin of error. But the shroud should be dated before the date of the crucifixion, because it is not reasonable to think it was made on the day of the crucifixion. You don't believe in any of this anyway, so why do you keep asking questions?
ingliz wrote:In non pathological H. sapiens the EQ (Encephalization Quotient) is in the area of 4.5 to 5.0. Using the method for calculating EQ in Ruff, E. et al. (Nature 387: 173-176) the EQ for the shroud figure is 2.6. Achieving a value anywhere close to that of modern man is not possible given the dimensions of the figure on the cloth.
The scientists that studied the Shroud say the man was about 5 feet 11 inches tall. I am not sure what you are talking about. The Shroud itself was 14 feet long that the man was placed on and then covered so there is an image of the front and back of the man on the linen burial shroud.
The Shroud of Turin is a 4.4 X 1.1 m linen cloth bearing the front and back body
images, accompanied by blood images, of what appears to be a crucified man. As it is alleged
to be the actual burial cloth of Jesus, it is a most controversial object. Many of those not
accepting this claim have asserted that it is just a painting, although it is now clear that the
blood images are due to the cloth having been in contact with a wounded human body. A large
body of scientific evidence has now been accumulated on this object and will be reviewed in
some detail, including the question of authenticity. It will be clear that it is not a painting, nor
any of several other recently suggested explanations such as a photograph, although the
mechanism of the formation of the body images remains a mystery. Matters concerning its
conservation will also be briefly touched upon.
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/adler.pdf
The more I study science, the more I believe in God.
- Albert Einstein
- Albert Einstein