The Shroud of Turin

[*crikey*mate*]

I am part way through reading a fiction book featuring The Shroud, and it has sparked my curiosity.

What do you know?

What do you think?

Me? I want to believe that it is real, but I'm not convinced one way or the other just yet, but I am interested in discussing it with anyone else interested in doing so.

 For something of such historical significance to truly exist would be amazing.

[azureline**]

and

In 1898, Secondo Pia was allowed to photograph the Shroud. The image he saw in his darkroom startled the world. The Shroud, it turns out, is like a photo negative.

"There were plenty of other images of Christ which are meant to be imprints of his face, dating from the middle ages," said de Wesselow. "And none of them look remotely like the Shroud."

Thomas de Wesselow's specialty is medieval art. "People did not know about negative images in those days. No one could have seen the realistic image that's hidden behind the negative image on the cloth."

In 1978, a group of respected American scientists and scholars calling themselves the Shroud of Turin Research Project (or STURP) were given 120 hours to subject the Shroud to a "CS"-like forensic study. Working 24 hours a day, they set out to discover how the image was made, and if it was a fake. They couldn't.

[twyngwyn]

http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-12-28/

[**meep**]

Turin shroud 'older than thought'

The Shroud of Turin is much older than suggested by radiocarbon dating carried out in the 1980s, according to a new study in a peer-reviewed journal.

A research paper published in Thermochimica Acta suggests the shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old.

The author dismisses 1988 carbon-14 dating tests which concluded that the linen sheet was a medieval fake.

The shroud, which bears the faint image of a blood-covered man, is believed by some to be Christ's burial cloth.

Raymond Rogers says his research and chemical tests show the material used in the 1988 radiocarbon analysis was cut from a medieval patch woven into the shroud to repair fire damage.

It was this material that was responsible for an invalid date being assigned to the original shroud cloth, he argues.

"The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic," said Mr Rogers, who is a retired chemist from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, US.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4210369.stm

[azureline**]

Yes, I was looking for that Meep, I knew I had read it.

Thomas De Wesselow used to be an atheist I believe, he is now not!

http://www.shroud-enigma.com/BSTS/bsts-uk-homepage.html

[azureline**]

Woops, my mistake...

De Wesselow - an agnostic, originally a skeptic about the Shroud - has just published a provocative new book about in which he concludes it's genuine.

[monman12]

"Me? I want to believe that it is real"

Why?

[*crikey*mate*]

What is the book that you're reading, Crikey?

"The Turin Shroud Secret" by Sam Christer.

I'm up tp page 385/503

FTR - all the glowing recommendations must relate to the pages I haven't read yet - LOL

[the_bob_delusion]

"Me? I want to believe that it is real"

Why?

exactly, why does it matter if it's real or not. 

if you have faith in your religion, evidence doesn't matter. 

[nevynreally]

exactly, why does it matter if it's real or not. 

if you have faith in your religion, evidence doesn't matter. 

It matters from a purely scientific point of view. 

Would be interesting if they were allowed to test it again.

[azureline**]

I would have bypassed that book for this one

The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection

 Thomas de Wesselow