Tuesday, November 21, 2023

Kim Dreisbach's "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" in favor of the Shroud's authenticity

Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the fourth installment of Rev. Albert Russel `Kim” Dreisbach

[Right: Fr. Kim Dreisbach on Shroud Encounter (YouTube).]

Jr. (1934-2006)'s "overwhelming preponderance of evidence" in favor of the Shroud's authenticity. I will quote it in full, but I might have to break it up into several posts. The original is a series of PDFs with handwritten notes on them, the latter which I will include in square brackets. My comments will be in bold.

On 8 October 2023, I emailed Ian Wilson and Joe Marino:

"Do you have a copy, that you can send me, of Kim Dreisbach's compilation of all the evidence in favor of authenticity, calling it the `overwhelming preponderance of evidence':
"On the counter-attack was Rev. Kim Dreisbach, an Anglican priest and long-time Shroud scholar in Atlanta, Georgia, who prepared a massive and impressive compilation of all the evidence in favor of authenticity, calling it the `overwhelming preponderance of evidence." He circulated it to dozens of people, and the press, but his efforts like mine met with little success in getting across to the mass media what a travesty had occurred.'" (Meacham, W., 2005, "The Rape of the Turin Shroud: How Christianity's Most Precious Relic was Wrongly Condemned and Violated," Lulu Press: Morrisville NC, pp.110-111).
Ian replied that he didn't think he had it anymore, but Joe replied that he did have it, albeit in an old format, which he would scan into a series of PDFs and email them to me. Which he kindly did.


[Proposed] PRESS RELEASE [Not prior to 26 Sep 88]

FROM: The Atlanta International Center for Continuing Study of the Shroud of Turin(AICCSST)

Atlanta, Georgia

CONTACT PERSON: The Rev. Albert R., Dreisbach, Jr., Executive Director (404) 344-8982 349-0001

RE: C-14 Dating of the Shroud of Turin

SYNOPSIS: THE ATLANTA INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR CONTINUING STUDY OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN, AN ECUMENICAL, NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION, REJECTS THE INITIAL C-14 DATING OF THE SHROUD AS "MEDIEVAL" BASING ITS STAND ON BOTH SCIENTIFIC GROUNDS AND THE PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE THROUGH THE CENTURIES FROM A HOST OF DIVERSE FIELDS RANGING FROM PHYSICS AND CHEMISTRY TO ART HISTORY AND FORENSIC PATHOLOGY, THE CENTER ARGUED THAT THE PRESENT RADIOCARBON RESULTS SHOULD BE REJECTED AT THIS TIME UNTIL PEER-REVIEW OF THESE RESULTS BY THE LARGER SCIENTIC COMMUNITY, MANY OF WHOM ARE SERIOUSLY CONCONCERNED ABOUT FLAWS IN THE PROTOCOL EMPLOYED BY ARIZONA. OXFORD AND ZURICH IN THE COURSE OF THEIR RECENT TESTING. CAUTIONING BOTH THE PUBLIC AND THE PRESS TO AVOID FACILE ACCEPTANCE OF THE ALLEGED "MEDIVAL"(sic) DATE, THE ATLANTA CENTER ADVOCATED THAT SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY IN A HOST OF SUB-FIELDS BE CONTINUED AND ENCOURAGED UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE SHROUD OF TURIN CAN BE EXPLAINED IN TERMS OF A 14TH CENTURY CONTEXT AND/OR BY NEW RADIOCARBON TESTING GUARANTEED BY RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC CONTROLS. This raises an important point that the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud as "1260-1390"[DP89, 611] has never been replicated independently by other laboratories. Therefore it cannot be considered "scientific knnowledge":

"Reproducibility, closely related to replicability and repeatability, is a major principle underpinning the scientific method. For the findings of a study to be reproducible means that results obtained by an experiment or an observational study or in a statistical analysis of a data set should be achieved again with a high degree of reliability when the study is replicated. There are different kinds of replication[1] but typically replication studies involve different researchers using the same methodology. Only after one or several such successful replications should a result be recognized as scientific knowledge" (my emphasis)[RPW].
Citing the PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE from such hard sciences as Physics and Chemistry already published in peer-reviewed scientific journals by scientists from such prestigious facilities as Los Alamos, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the U.S. Air Force Weapons Laboratory, the Atlanta International Center for Continuing Study of the Shroud of Turin, Inc. issued a statement today seriously questioning the conclusion of the C-14 laboratories at the University of Arizona, Oxford and Zurich alleging the Shroud of Turin to date from the Middle Ages. Noting that scientists from both Oxford and Arizona, have concluded that the Shroud "is not a painting" and that the mechanism for the image formation of the ventral and dorsal side of the figure on it "continues to remain a mystery'", AICCSST's Executive Director, the Rev. Albert R. Dreisbach, Jr., cautioned both the public and the press to withhold judgment on the alleged "medieval" (sic) date until "all the facts are in, and the larger scientific community has been given an opportunity to thoroughly review the protocol used by the three labs in their investigations." Fr. Dreisbach then went on to outline what he believes to be some of the major flaws of that protocol:
1) At a 1986 conference in Turin called to determine the protocol for C-14 testing, it was stressed by experts in attendance that prior to any such testing detailed and extensive chemistry should be conducted to determine the kinds of contaminants on the Shroud, methods for the detection of same, and procedures for their removal complete with scientific controls for same. In a six-laboratory "dry run" of known-dated samples provided by the British Museum whose results were announced at a Radiocarbon Conference in Trondheim in 1985, the same Swiss lab which today announced its concurrence of a "medieval"(sic) date had an outlier of 1,000 years difference from the other five labs. Careful examination of this outlier proved it to have resulted from "improper cleansing"' of the sample. When the proper technique was applied on the second run, the Swiss lab· then came on line with the others.

2) Despite repeated attempts by some of the experts present at that 1986 Turin conference for sampling from at least two separate areas on the Shroud. (Note; three distinct sites would have been even more preferable)., the decision was made to take the samples only from a single site; and that, one of the worst possible sites available. (Note; The eventual site chosen for the removal of the sample on 21Apr88 was from the edge of the Shroud most exposed to human handling and industrial pollution during its public and private expositions through the centuries.)

3) In addition to potential skewing of the C-14 date via contamination, experts also warned that “possible isotope exchange spurred by heating may likely affect the radiocarbon age of the cloth." The Sunday London Times in its edition of August 7, 1988, observed:
"Those convinced that the shroud really was Christ's burial cloth could argue that the same burst of energy which created the image also irradiated (i.e. affected via radiation) the cloth. That would make the cloth appear younger than its true age.” Nick Rufford, Science Correspondent, p. 1. Emphasis added.)
One would not even have to posit a non-empirically verifiable event such as the Resurrection to account for such an isotope exchange via heating. Even as this release is being made available to the media, experts familiar with the myriad subtleties of the Shroud are investigating the possibility that the very site from which the C-14 samples were taken was subject to a "mild scorch" - possibly as a result of the fire of 1532 at Chambery in France . Since portions of the silver casket containing the Shroud melted during this fire, it is estimated that the heat of the latter reached 800 degrees centigrade.
On the topic of "improper cleansing," for the Shroud to have the `bull's eye' radiocarbon date of "1260-1390," or 1325 ±65 years[WI98, 7; TF06, 169], which is only ~30 years before the Shroud first appeared in undisputed history at Lirey, France, in ~1355[WI10, 222], the laboratories would have had to remove almost all contamination by younger carbon. Otherwise the Shroud's radiocarbon date would be more recent than 1355! But that would have been impossible because the fire of 1532 and the water that extinguished it, would have forced large quantities of new carbon from the smoke of the burning chapel into the molecular structure of the linen, where it could not be removed:
"Because of the fire and the melting of the silver casket, the heat inside would have been intense, and a temperature in the region of 900°C the temperature of molten silver alloy) would probably have been reached. In these circumstances, natural moisture in the Shroud, perhaps together with dousing water, would turn into steam, in places to superheat. Any contaminants on or embedded in the fabric structure would be dissolved and forced into the yarn construction, conditions in which they would react chemically with the molecular structure of the fibres of the flax ... Contaminants on the surface of the cloth, within the interlacements of the weave, on the surface of the yarns, and even within their twisted structures can be removed with suitable surfactants and ultrasonic treatments. At fibre-molecular level, however, the problem of contaminants presents specific difficulties ... contaminating molecules can also enter and link chemically into the fine structure through what are envisaged as 'pores' in the fibre ... In this way, organic molecules containing carbon would become part of the flax-fibre chemistry and would be impossible to remove by surfactants and ultrasonic cleansing treatments. More drastic methods to remove the contaminants so as to obtain a pure specimen would inevitable destroy the flax fibre themselves"[TJ96, 7]
Therefore the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud must not only be wrong, but fraudulent! According to my hacker theory, they are computer-generated dates by a hacker's program (see 24May14 and 23Jul15).

To be continued in the fifth installment of this post.

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]

Bibliography
DP89. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16th February, 611-615.
RPW. "Reproducibility," Wikipedia, 17 November 2023.
TF06. Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition.
TJ96. Tyrer, J., 1996, “Is It Really A Fake?,” from Textile Horizons, March 1989, Shroud News, No 62, December, 6-9.
WI98. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY.
WI10. Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London.

Posted 21 November 2023. Updated 28 November 2023.

Wednesday, November 8, 2023

The Shroudman and Jesus were resurrected! #43: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet!

THE SHROUDMAN AND JESUS WERE RESURRECTED! #42
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #43, "The Shroudman and Jesus were resurrected!," of my series, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet!." For more information about this series, see the "Main index #1" and "Other marks and images #26." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Main index #1] [Previous: The Shroudman and Jesus were buried in a rock tomb #42] [Next: To be advised #44]


  1. The Bible and the Shroud #33
    1. The Shroudman and Jesus were resurrected! #43

[Above (enlarge)[MR86]: A painting by English artist Thomas Frank Heaphy (1813-73) in the 1850s, of a fresco in the ceiling of the earliest Orpheus Cubiculum section of the Catacomb of Domitilla, Rome, dated to the time of Nero (r. 54–68)[MR93, 28]. Heaphy wrongly thought he was in the catacomb of Saints Nereo and Achilleo[MR93, 28]. A Shroud-like Jesus is uniquely depicted in profile[WI92, 8], naked with a white cloth over his shoulder. Presumably Jesus sitting up at His resurrection with the Shroud still partly covering Him! If so, this is the earliest, mid-first century, depiction of the Shroud! See 05Jun21; 13Jul22 & 21Mar23]

Jesus was resurrected
• Jesus predicted his death and resurrection (Mt 16:21; 17:9, 22-23; 20:18-19).

• Jesus died on a cross (see 23Jan23a).

• Jesus' body was not in his tomb because he had "risen" (Mt 28:6; Mk 16:6; Lk 24:6).

• Jesus had "risen from the dead" (Mt 28:7; 2Tim 2:8).

• Jesus was "raised from the dead" (1Cor 15:3-4, 12, 20).

• God raised Jesus from the dead (Acts 3:15; 4:10; 5:30; 10:40; 13:30,34,37).

• Jesus was resurrected (Acts 2:31; 4:33; 1Pet 3:21).

• Jesus was resurrected from the dead (Acts 4:2; Rom 1:4; 1Pet 1:3).

• Jesus' body did not experience corruption because he was resurrected (Acts 2:27, 31; 13:34-37; Ps 16:10)[SH90, 91; IJ98, 181].

• At his resurrection, Jesus' body did, as his followers' bodies will, change state from "perishable" to "imperishable," from "mortal" to immortal (1Cor 15:51-53), from "lowly" to "glorious" (Php 3:21).

• Jesus appeared to his disciples after his resurrection[WE54, 52-53; IJ98, 57]: Mary Magdalene (Mk 16:9-11; Jn 20:11-18)[IJ98, 181]. The two other women who had been to the tomb (Mt 28:1,8-19). The apostle Peter (Lk 24:34; 1Cor 15:5). Two on the road to Emmaus (Mk 16:12-13; Lk 24:13-32). The apostles, except for Thomas (Lk 24:36-49; Jn 20:19-25). The apostles including Thomas (Jn 20:26-29; 1Cor 15:5). Seven disciples on the shore of the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1-23). The apostles on a mountain in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20). To over 500 disciples (1Cor 15:6). His brother James (1Cor 15:7). Jesus' disciples at his ascension (Mk 16:19-20; Lk 24:50-53; Acts 1:6-12).

• Jesus' resurrection body was "mechanically transparent": after his resurrection, on two separate occasions, Jesus suddenly appeared to his disciples inside a locked room (Jn 20:19, 26)[OM10, 244]

The Shroudman was resurrected
• The Shroudman died on a cross.(see 23Jan23b).

• There is no evidence of bodily decomposition on the Shroud[SH81, 127, 155, 218; SH90, 91, 138 AM00, 33; HG84, 159].

• The bloodstains are intact, unbroken and unsmeared[SH81, 127, 156, 218; SH90, 138; AM00, 33], indicating the body was not unwrapped[SH81, 156, 218; HG84, 159; SH90, 138-139].

• The Shroudman's fingers, handbones (see below), and teeth (20Apr17) are visible under his skin due to x-rays generated by his resurrection[CG82, 445-446; SH90, 136].

[Above (enlarge): Extract of a positive photograph of the Shroud showing the finger (phalanges) and the hand (metacarpals) bones beneath the skin[LM10]. See 20Apr17]

• A dead body would not leave such an image on the Shroud[AM00, 234].

• The man's image is the result of a scorch[DR84, 18; HG84, 159]. In both color and character the image resembles the portions of the cloth that were scorched by the fire of 1532[DR84, 18; PM96, 221]. A scorch can produce an image that reproduces details as small as an ninth of an inch (~3.2 mm)[DR84, 18]. And when photographed, yields a positive image on the photographic negative[DR84, 18]. A burst of radiation at the moment of resurrection would cause a scorch[DR84, 18]. But it was not heat radiation because the blood was not scorched[HT78, 199]. Also, the image does not fluoresce under ultraviolet light whereas the areas of the Shroud scorched by the fire of 1532, do fluoresce in ultraviolet light[SH90, 204; PM96, 221].

• Only some form of radiation could have caused the Shroudman's image[AM00, 234]. The image is present even where the cloth could not have been in direct contact with the body[SH90, 205; AM00, 309].

[Above (enlarge[JJ77, 76]): Microdensitometer scan along the ridge line of the points of contact of the body with the Shroud. As can be seen, there could not have been direct contact of the body with the Shroud between the chin and chest, and the legs betwen the knees and toes, yet there is an image of such low points on the Shroud (see Shroud Scope).]

• Only a cloth collapsing through a `mechanically transparent' body giving off uniform radiant energy can explain all the Shroud image's features[AM00, 234].

Conclusion
In conclusion, as we can see above, both Jesus and the man on the Shroud:
• Died on a cross.
• Did not undergo bodily decomposition.
• Their bodies became "mechanically transparent."
• Were resurrected!

Therefore they are one and the same! Jesus is the Man on the Shroud!!

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]

Bibliography
AM00. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.
CG82. Carter, G.F., 1982, "Formation of the Image on the Shroud of Turin by x-Rays: A New Hypothesis," in Lambert, J.B., ed., 1984, "Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry, No. 205," American Chemical Society, Washington D.C., 425-446.
DR84. Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham MD.
HG84". Habermas, G.R., 1984, "Ancient Evidence for the Life of Jesus," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN.
HT78". Humber, T., 1978, "The Sacred Shroud," [1974], Pocket Books: New York NY.
IJ98". Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY.
JJ77". Jackson, J.P., Jumper, E.J., Mottern, R.W. & Stevenson, K.E., ed., 1977, "The Three Dimensional Image on Jesus' Burial Cloth," in Stevenson, K.E., ed., "Proceedings of the 1977 United States Conference of Research on The Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Bronx NY.
LM10. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002 Vertical," Sindonology.org.
MR86. Morgan, R., 1986, "The Holy Shroud and the Earliest Paintings of Christ," Runciman Press: Manly NSW, Australia.
MR93. Morgan, R.H., 1993, "New Evidence for the Earliest Portrait of Jesus," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 42, December, 28-29.
OM10. Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK.
PM96. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta.
SH81. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI.
SH90. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, -91.
WI92. Wilson, I., 1992, "Still in Rome: Rediscovery of 'Oldest Painted Likeness of Christ'?," BSTS Newsletter, No. 32, 7-10.
WE54. Wuenschel, E.A. 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961.

Posted 8 November 2023. Updated 2 December 2023.

Saturday, September 9, 2023

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Twenty-first century (2)

Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present
TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY (2)
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is part #32, "Twenty-first century" (2) of my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 - present" series. For more information about this series see the Index #1. This page was initially based on Ian Wilson's 1996, "Highlights of the Undisputed History: 2000's." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Index #1] [Previous: 21st century (1) #31] [Next: 21st century (3) #33]


21st century (2) (2011-20).

2011 November. ENEA, Italy's National Agency for New Technologies,

[Right: ENEA's Hercules- L XeCl excimer (ultraviolet) laser[HEL]. See 22Dec11.]

Energy and Sustainable Development, publishes a report[MD12] on five years (2005-10) of experiments conducted in the ENEA center of Frascati on the "shroud-like coloring of linen fabrics by far ultraviolet radiation"[TM11]. "The scientists ... concluded that the exact shade, texture and depth of the imprints on the cloth could only be produced with the aid of ultraviolet lasers ..."!:

The double image (front and back) of a scourged and crucified man, barely visible on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin, has many physical and chemical characteristics that are so particular that the staining ... is impossible to obtain in a laboratory,' concluded experts from Italy's National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development. The scientists set out to `identify the physical and chemical processes capable of generating a colour similar to that of the image on the Shroud.' They concluded that the exact shade, texture and depth of the imprints on the cloth could only be produced with the aid of ultraviolet lasers – technology that was clearly not available in medieval times. The scientists used extremely brief pulses of ultraviolet light to replicate the kind of marks found on the burial cloth.They concluded that the iconic image of the bearded man must therefore have been created by `some form of electromagnetic energy (such as a flash of light at short wavelength).' Although they stopped short of offering a non-scientific explanation for the phenomenon, their findings will be embraced by those who believe that the marks on the shroud were miraculously created at the moment of Christ's Resurrection'[SN11].
"However ... the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts"!:
"One of the assumptions related to the formation of the image was that regarding some form of electromagnetic energy (such as a flash of light at short wavelength), which could fit the requirements for reproducing the main features of the Shroud image, such as superficiality of color, color gradient, the image also in areas of the body not in contact with the cloth and the absence of pigment on the sheet ... the results of ENEA `show that a short and intense burst of VUV [vacuum ultraviolet] directional radiation can color a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin, including shades of color, the surface color of the fibrils of the outer linen fabric, and the absence of fluorescence'. `However, ENEA scientists warn, `it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2 = 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come to several billion watts)"[TM11]!
This is further evidence that the man on the Shroud is Jesus! And that Jesus' image on the Shroud is, as prefigured by his Transfiguration (Mt 17:1-13; Mk 9:2-13; Lk 9:28-36), where His "face shone like the sun, and his clothes became white as light" (Mt 17:2); "his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them" (Mk 9:3); "the appearance of his face was altered, and his clothing became dazzling white" (Lk 9:29). (See 23Jun15, 05Sep16, 05Feb17, 07Mar19 & 08Dec22). The Transfiguration was "a preview of the glorified body of Christ following his Resurrection"[TJW]! That is, of Jesus "departure [exodos], which he was soon to accomplish at Jerusalem"[Lk 9:31].

And that radiant energy of "34 thousand billion watts" came from the change of state of Jesus' "lowly," "flesh and blood" body into his "glorious" resurrection body (see 10Oct08, 06Oct13, 05Feb17, 13Jul22 & 08Dec22):

"... the Lord Jesus Christ, who, by the power that enables him to bring everything under his control, will transform our lowly bodies so that they will be like his glorious body." (Php 3:20-21).

"...`How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?' ... ... The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory." (1Cor 15:35,41-42).

"... flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. ... the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed." (1Cor 15:50-52).

Just a fraction of the "7.8 septillion Joules of energy" in Jesus' human body:
"As per e=mc^2 average human body has 7.8 septillion Joules of energy..."[QR23]
2012a 26 March 2012. Publication of "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin

[Left: "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection – 26 March 2012"[SS12]. See my 28Mar12 & 29Mar12.]

and the Secret of the Resurrection" by agnostic art historian Thomas de Wesselow. This is an important book becauase de Wesselow is an agnostic art historian who believes: 1) the Shroud is Jesus' burial sheet; but 2) the image on the Shroud was Jesus' resurrection! Here is de Wesselow's description of his conversion to a Shroudie:
"One hot, bright morning in the early summer of 2004 I ambled out into the orchard beside my house in Cambridge, lay down on the grass and immersed myself in The Turin Shroud [1978] by Ian Wilson ... I had spent the previous few days reading up on the Shroud, my interest having been kindled by a TV documentary screened that Easter, which cast serious doubt on the reliability of the carbon-dating test. I was now thoroughly hooked on the subject. Since no one else seemed able to unravel the history and significance of the relic, I was determined to think it through for myself ... I hoped Wilson's book ... might act as a catalyst. It did. Leafing through its arguments and illustrations, I became caught up in the Shroud's mystery as never before ... Though sceptical of the relic's authenticity ... I was nevertheless fascinated by some of the historical evidence Wilson presented. Various texts he cited - such as Robert de Clari's account of the Byzantine cloth on which 'the figure of Our Lord could be plainly seen' [see 11Nov17] did seem to point to a Shroud-like relic existing long before the fifteenth century, the date indicated by the problematic carbon-14 test. Moreover, I was aware by then of the major clue first recognized by Andre Dubarle: the distinctive pattern of the 'poker-holes' found on the representation of Christ's burial cloth in the Pray Codex [see 21Aug18]. Unable to dismiss this as a coincidence, I found myself forced to reckon with the heretical idea that the Shroud was already known in the twelfth century. I also had to admit that Wilson's identification of the Shroud with the Mandylion [see 15Sep12] was plausible and accounted for a good deal of evidence that, as far as I could see, orthodox opinion either ignored or dismissed without proper justification ... If Wilson's theory was correct, the Shroud's provenance could be traced back to the sixth century. And if it was that old, the chances of its being a fake were drastically reduced. As an agnostic, used to thinking about Jesus in conventional Christian terms, I was extremely uncomfortable with the idea that the Shroud might be an authentic marvel; and, as an art historian familiar with the merry-go-round of medieval relics, I was extremely sceptical that this one - the most astonishing of all - might be genuine. Nevertheless, having considered every alternative explanation and found it wanting, I felt pinned down and forced to think the unthinkable. The execution and burial of Jesus, I told myself, is the only recorded event that could have resulted in a length of linen becoming stained by the body of a man flogged, crucified, crowned with thorns and speared in the side, and it is an event that is unlikely ever to have been exactly repeated. I couldn't avoid the conclusion: from a purely historical point of view, the death and burial of Jesus seemed to be the best explanation for the Shroud"[DT12, 190-191]
But then, refusing to surrender his "secular worldview" and accept that Jesus was resurrected, and the image on the Shroud is a "snapshot" of His resurrection:
"Even from the limited available information, a hypothetical glimpse of the power operating at the moment of creation of the Shroud's image may be ventured. In the darkness of the Jerusalem tomb the dead body of Jesus lay, unwashed, covered in blood, on a stone slab. Suddenly, there is a burst of mysterious power from it. In that instant the ... image ... of the body becomes indelibly fused onto the cloth, preserving for posterity a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection"[WI79, 251].
de Wesselow deludes himself that the Shroud image was Jesus' resurrection:
"For a sceptical agnostic, this was a suffocating thought. The idea that the Shroud might be authentic hinted at something uncanny happening to Jesus' body in the tomb. Preconditioned as I was, my thoughts inevitably turned to the supposed miracle that lies at the heart of Christianity, the Resurrection, an idea that challenged some of my deepest convictions ... It was then that I glimpsed, for the first time, the potential significance of the relic. Grappling with the idea that it might have been found in the tomb of Jesus, I asked myself a question that has baffled generations of Shroud-enthusiasts: if the relic is authentic, why do none of the Gospels mention its discovery in the empty tomb? [see 06Nov14] And then it struck me: maybe they do. Maybe the Gospels contain descriptions of the Shroud that no one has recognized as such since the days of the apostles, because it appears in their legendary narratives not as an image but as a supernatural person"[DT12, 192-193].
But fatal problems with de Wesselow's theory that Jesus' image on the Shroud (de Wesselow admits that it is Jesus') was His resurrection, include:
• It requires a wholesale rejection of what the Gospels actually say, and replacing it with what the agnostic de Wesselow, wants them to say. • Peter and John didn't see in the empty tomb, either the Shroud (sindon) or Jesus (Jn 20:3-10; Lk 24:12 NIV). Shroudies do not require the Shroud to have been in the empty tomb when Peter and John were the first to enter it[Jn 20:1-8 NIV] (see my "Servant of the priest" series). But de Wesselow's `the Shroud was the resurrection' theory does require it[see above and DT12, 244ff]. • Jesus not only appeared to his disciples after his resurrection, he talked to them: Mary Magdalene (Jn 20:14-18); the other women disciples returning from the empty tomb (Mt 28:1, 8-10:28); Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus (Mk 16:12; Lk 24:13-33); the eleven apostles in a locked room in Jerusalem (Mk 16:14; Lk 24:33-49; Jn 20:19-29); the disciples on the shore of the Sea of Galilee (Jn 21:1-23); the eleven apostles on a mountain in Galilee (Mt 28:16-20; Acts 1:1-8). The Apostle Paul (then Saul of Tarsus) on the road to Damascus (Acts 9:1-6; 22:6-10; 26:12-18). The Shroud doesn't talk. • Jesus' resurrected body had "flesh and bones" (Lk 24:36-40). The Shroud doesn't have flesh and bones. • The resurrected Jesus ate food (Lk 24:41-42; Jn 21:9-15). The Shroud doesn't eat. • Jesus ascended into heaven (Acts 1:9-11). The Shroud remained here on Earth. • The image is on the inside of the Shroud, nearest Jesus' body, not the le outside of it, so the disciples would not know that the image was there. The women who went to the tomb to anoint Jesus' body (Mt 28:1; Mk 16:1; Lk 23:55-24:1; Jn 20:1) would have pulled back the Shroud from Jesus' dead body, but they didn't because Jesus body wasn't there, having been resurrected (Mt 28:1-6; Mk 16:1, 5-6; Lk 24:1-6; Jn 20:1-2). • Finally, there wouldn't be an image on the Shroud if Jesus hadn't been resurrected (see the ENEA laser experiment above). See further my "Combined Review of: `The Sign' by Thomas de Wesselow and `Resurrected or Revived?' by Helmut Felzmann."

2012b 28-30 April. 1st International Congress on the Holy Shroud in Spain is held in Valencia, Spain. The event is sponsored by the Centro Español de Sindonologia (CES). Online papers include: "Could A Burst of Radiation Create a Shroud-Like Coloration? A Summary of 5 years of Experiments at ENEA Frascati... by Paolo di Lazzaro ..."; "Analysis of micro-particles vacuumed from the Turin Shroud ... by G. Fanti ...". See my 18Oct15 that this vacuumed dust in between the underside of the Shroud and its Holland Cloth backing had been sealed from 1534 to 1978 = 444 years. So it is significant that in the dust a pollen grain was identified which was from a Mediterranean plant species, Phillyrea Angustifolia, that had been identified on the Shroud by Max Frei (1913-83):

"During the analysis, some particles were associated, by size, to pollen grain, which, however, were not simple to identify due to surface alterations. In the Stub HH it has been observed a grain identified as pollen grain of Phillyrea Angustifolia ... where M. Frei's reported some micrographs made at SEM of 48 varieties of pollen. Among those SEM photos there is one of the same Phillyrea Angustifolia ..." (footnotes ommitted)[FG12, 5].
Fanti, et al., answered the criticism by Shroud sceptic Steven Schafersman that Frei must have faked his pollen samples because his SEM (scanning electron microscope) photos were too perfect:
"I first suspected that Max Frei's data were faked when I saw the movie `Witness of the Shroud' [sic `Silent Witness'] on television. One segment showed Frei addressing the assembled shroud devotees with huge projections of SEM photomicrographs of his pollen. In the dozens of illustrations, each species was represented by four or five perfectly preserved specimens; the pollen looked fresh-as-new. In the four published SEM photomicrographs, each illustration shows four or five pollen grains piled up, with perhaps more underneath. What a treasure trove! Frei had been lucky enough to discover hundreds of perfectly-preserved pollen grains on the Shroud, a number of each species ... I must say that in my opinion, the excellent and abundant pollen in Frei's SEM photomicrographs look like pollen removed from living plants ... At this point, let me again state my argument. Although I can't prove that Max Frei falsified his data by spiking his own samples, I have presented evidence to show that this is the most reasonable explanation for the reported results"[SS99, 306-307].
But Frei died unexpectedly in 1983 and could not answer his critics. However, Fanti, et al., pointed out that it was the norm in Frei's day to show perfect SEM photos of pollen grains, therefore other scientists at that time were not mislead by Frei's pollen photos:
"M. Frei was accused of fraud because he reported the SEM photos of pollen grains similar to those detected in his glasses and not just the pollen grains coming from the TS. This accusation can be right for scientists of our days, but other scientists in the 1970-1990 used to publish photoscorresponding but not equal to the pollen grain under examination"[FG12, 6].
2012c 15 September. My post (perhaps my most important), "Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin"[JS12]. Historian Ian Wilson,

[Above (enlarge): Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin illustrated: The full-length Shroud of Turin (1), is doubled four times (2 through 5), resulting in Jesus' face within a rectangle, in landscape aspect (5), exactly as depicted in the earliest copies of the Image of Edessa, the 11th century Sakli church, Turkey (6) and the 10th century icon of King Abgar V of Edessa holding the Image of Edessa, St. Catherine's monastery, Sinai (7).[JS12].]

having read in an English translation of The Acts of Thaddeus that Jesus' image was imprinted on a "towel," where the underlying Greek word is tetradiplon, "doubled in four," theorised that the sixth century Image of Edessa was actually the Shroud "doubled in four" with the face one-eighth fold uppermost (see above)[JS17]:

"Wilson's theory is further endorsed by the unique use of the word tetradiplon, which describes the Image of Edessa/Mandylion. This description occurs soon after the cloth is rediscovered after five centuries of absence. The word tetradiplon, is first found in a sixth-century text, [The Acts of Thaddeus] then again as rakos tetradiplon in a tenth- century text [Monthly Lection] written not long after the cloth's arrival in Constantinople. According to Cambridge University Professor G. W. H. Lampe, editor of the Lexicon of Patristic Greek, in all of literature the word tetradiplon is used only in connection with descriptions of the Image of Edessa/Mandylion. As such, this usage could hardly be said to have been an idle turn of phrase. This word is a compound of two very ordinary Greek words tetra meaning `four,' and diplos, meaning `doubled,' hence `doubled in four.' The uniqueness of this term in descriptions of the Mandylion suggests that the author was trying to characterize what he may have been fortunate to observe-the way a full-length cloth was folded within its frame in a doubled-in-four manner. Otherwise, usage of this term in connection with the Mandylion has no apparent meaning"[AM00, 132-133]

2013a 23 March. Publication of Prof. Giulio Fanti (1956-) and journalist Saverio Gaeta (1958-) book, "Il Mistero della Sindone" ("The Mystery of the Shroud"). It is in Italian and there does not appear to have been an English translation of it. But in 2020 Fanti published another book, "The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!" (see future "2020") which covers these same three tests. And there there have been English articles about this 2013 Fanti book:

"New scientific experiments carried out at the University of Padua have apparently confirmed that the Shroud Turin can be dated back to the 1st century AD. This makes its compatible with the tradition which claims that the cloth with the image of the crucified man imprinted on it is the very one Jesus' body was wrapped in when he was taken off the cross. The news will be published in a book by Giulio Fanti, professor of mechanical and thermal measurement at the University of Padua's Engineering Faculty, and journalist Saverio Gaeta, out tomorrow. "Il Mistero della Sindone" (The Mystery of the Shroud) is edited by Rizzoli (240 pp, 18 Euro). What's new about this book are Fanti's recent findings, which are also about to be published in a specialist magazine and assessed by a scientific committee. The research includes three new tests, two chemical ones and one mechanical one. The first two were carried out with an FT-IR system, so using infra-red light, and the other using Raman spectroscopy. The third was a multi-parametric mechanical test based on five different mechanical parameters linked to the voltage of the wire. The machine used to examine the Shroud's fibres and test traction, allowed researchers to examine tiny fibres alongside about twenty samples of cloth dated between 3000 BC and 2000 AD. The new tests carried out in the University of Padua labs were carried out by a number of university professors from various Italian universities and agree that the Shroud dates back to the period when Jesus Christ was crucified in Jerusalem. Final results show that the Shroud fibres examined produced the following dates, all of which are 95% certain and centuries away from the medieval dating obtained with Carbon-14 testing in 1988: the dates given to the Shroud after FT-IR testing, is 300 BC ±400, 200 BC ±500 after Raman testing and 400 AD ±400 after multi-parametric mechanical testing. The average of all three dates is 33 BC ±250 years. The book's authors observed that the uncertainty of this date is less than the single uncertainties and the date is compatible with the historic date of Jesus' death on the cross, which historians claim occurred in 30 AD. The tests were carried out using tiny fibres of material extracted from the Shroud by micro-analyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana [1935-2008] who passed away in 2008 but had participated in the 1988 research project and gave the material to Fanti through the cultural institute Fondazione 3M.)"[TA13].
This is summarised in the following table:

TestMax/MinRange
FT-IR300 BC ±400700 BC-AD 100
Raman200 BC ± 500700 BC-AD 300
Mechanical400 AD ± 400AD 0 - AD 800

So all three tests yield a date range in which Jesus' death in AD 30[DK15] falls! See my posts of 27Mar13, 02Apr13 & 21Apr13. I will comment on this further when I post on Fanti's 2000 book (see future "2000"). Moreover, this complements the finding of STURP chemist Ray Rogers (1927–2005) that the vanillin content of the Shroud was consistent with it being "between 1300 and 3000 years old," i.e. 150 BC ± 850 (see "2005a"). And they were in turn complemented by a 2022 (see future "2022") publication by De Caro, et al, that Wide Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) of a Shroud sample had returned a date similar to a first century linen sample from Masada, the Jewish fortress overrun by the Romans in 74 (see 04Apr22). These five different dating methods of the Shroud are compatible with the AD 30 date of Jesus' death, enshroudment and burial, but are totally incompatible with the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud!

2013b 30 March. Pope Benedict XVI (r. 2005-13), in one of his last acts as Pontiff, authorizes a television only exhibition of the Shroud of Turin directly from the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin. This is the first such exhibition in 40 years, since the first ever TV exposition of the Shroud on November 23rd, 1973. Newly elected Pope Francis (r. 2013-) makes the first comments of his papacy on the Turin Shroud just hours before it airs on television.

2014a 18 February. My first post of a four-part series, "Were the radiocarbon dating laboratories duped by a computer hacker? (1)," "(2)", "(3)" & "Summary". My first, tentatative, proposal that the

[Right (enlarge[PM14]). Schematic of Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory's then AMS system[22Feb14], with a photo of its computer at bottom left (evidently a DEC PDP-11/70).]

1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud was the result of a computer hacking, was, for the reasons given:

"So it is not an unreasonable proposition that a KGB agent hacked into the AMS system control console computer at each of the three C-14 labs and inserted a program which, when each test was run, replaced the Shroud's 1st or early century C-14 date, with dates which when calibrated, would yield years clustering around AD 1325, just before the Shroud's appearance in undisputed history in the 1350s"[07Mar14].
2014b 31 March. The first post of my 18-part series: "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker." Points include: • Since the Shroud is first century (according to the overwhelming weight of the evidence), the improbability that it has a radiocarbon date of 13th/14th century is "astronomical", "about one in a thousand trillion" and "totally impossible"[#1]; • "All this was under computer control and the calculations produced by the computer were displayed on a cathode ray screen" [#4]. Between the AMS system and the scientists reading the results was a computer. And a computer is hackable!; • German hacker Karl Koch (1965 – c. 23 May 1989) committed `suicide' on c. 23 May 1989 and Arizona radiocarbon dating laboratory physicist Timothy W. Linick (1946- 4 June 1989) committed `suicide' on 4 June 1989 - one day after Koch's body was publicly identified as his by West German police on 3 June 1989! [#10(7)]; • Linick was the primary leaker of Arizona's first "1350" date[#6]; David Sox (1936-2016) was the secondary leaker of Arizona's first "1350" date[#7]. Sox worked at the same American School in London at the same time as Timothy Linick's half-brother Anthony Linick (1938-), for at least 13 years from 1982 to 1995[22Feb16]!

2014c 4-5 September. An international Shroud conference titled, "Workshop on Advances in the Turin Shroud Investigation," is sponsored by the Technical University of Bari, Italy and the University of Bari "Aldo Moro," Italy with the technical co-sponsorship of the CIS (International Center for Turin Shroud Studies), Turin. The event was organized by the Department of Electrical and Information Engineering of the Technical University of Bari, Italy.

2014d 9-12 October: An international Shroud conference titled, "Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science," is organized by Joe Marino in St. Louis, Missouri and co-sponsored by the Resurrection of the Shroud Foundation and the Salt River Production Group. More than 160 people attend the four day event.

2015a 19 April - 24 June. The Shroud goes on public display for the

[Above (enlarge): The Shroud in its high-tech container during the 2015 Exposition in Turin Cathedral[HS15].]

first time since 2010.

2015b 5 October. Publication of article, Barcaccia, G., et al., "Uncovering the sources of DNA found on the Turin Shroud," Nature, Scientific Reports 5 (see 18Oct15):

"The Turin Shroud is traditionally considered to be the burial cloth in which the body of Jesus Christ was wrapped after his death approximately 2000 years ago. Here, we report the main findings from the analysis of genomic DNA extracted from dust particles vacuumed from parts of the body image and the lateral edge used for radiocarbon dating. Several plant taxa native to the Mediterranean area were identified as well as species with a primary center of origin in Asia, the Middle East or the Americas but introduced in a historical interval later than the Medieval period"[BG15]

[Above (enlarge): Figure 1: Plant DNA species found on the Turin Shroud. As can be seen, some of these came from Jerusalem, Sanliurfa (ancient Edessa) and Constantinople. But since the Shroud has since 1355 an undisputed, documented history within Western Europe, this is further evidence against the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud claim that: "Very small samples from the Shroud of Turin have been dated by accelerator mass spectrometry in laboratories at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich. ... The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval. ... AD 1260-1390"[DP89, 611].

Moreover (see 10Nov15):

"Regarding human mitogenome lineages, our analyses detected sequences from multiple subjects of different ethnic origins, which clustered into a number of Western Eurasian haplogroups, including some known to be typical of Western Europe, the Near East, the Arabian Peninsula and the Indian sub-continent. 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."[BG15]

[Above (enlarge): Extract from "Figure 2: Human mtDNA haplogroups found on the Turin Shroud." "A haplogroup is a genetic population group of people who share a common ancestor"[HPG]. The article explains that, "Haplogroup H33 is ... mainly found [in] ... Israel, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria ... while haplogroups M39, M56, R7 and R8 are typical of the Indian subcontinent ..."[BG15]. But, according to the the `twin pillars of Shroud scepticism': 1) The 1389 Memorandum of Bishop Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-1395), that one of his predecessors, Bishop Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354–1370) had discovered that the Shroud had been "cunningly painted" by a local Troyes artist (see "1389a"); and 2) the 1260-1390 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, mid-point 1325 (see "1988s"), claimed that, "the flax from which the shroud's linen was made was harvested between 1260 and 1390 AD"[GH96, 301]. But then Shroud scepticism would have to provide a plausible explanation of why the Shroud has Middle Eastern and Indian human DNA adhering to it, yet found its way to an unknown local artist in Troyes, France in c. 1355! As with the plant DNA, this wide diversity of human mtDNA in the interspace between the underside of the Shroud and its Holland cloth backing, which (again) was sewn on in 1534 in Chambéry, France, and only partially opened in 1978 and 1988 inside Turin Cathedral, is consistent with the Shroud having had at least ~15 centuries history up to 1534, including Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece and France. But it is inconsistent with the Shroud having had only a ~2-3 centuries history, in France only, from 1260 up to 1534, as the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud claimed (above).]

2016a 7 June. Publication of "5 minutes with ... The earliest painted representation of the Turin Shroud," Christie's.

[Above (enlarge)[DE16]: A double-page depiction of the Shroud in Johann von Erlach (1474-1539),'s prayerbook being held by three Bishops at an exposition. Its undamaged state shows it pre-dates the fire of 1532 [see "1532"]), and may be the earliest (or second only to the 1516 Lier copy [see 1516b]) surviving painted representation of the Shroud. See 26Jul16 & 25Sep19].

2016b 24 July. First post of this my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present." As far as I am aware, this is the only chronology of the Shroud from AD 30 to the present. However, it relied heavily on Ian Wilson's "Chronology of the Turin Shroud" in his 1998 book, "The Blood and the Shroud"[WI98, 262-313] and his online "Highlights of the Undisputed History: 1300s- 2000s."

2017a 3 April. "In a study released Friday by the Catholic University of Murcia (UCAM) in Spain, researchers offered the newest forensic evidence suggesting the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo came from the same period and covered the same person. The Sudarium of Oviedo also shows the man suffered a wound from a sharp object after death. This accords with the account given by St. John in his Gospel, which describes a Roman centurion opening Christ's side with a spear while He still hung on the Cross [Jn 19:34]. Alfonso Sánchez Hermosilla, one of the project's lead researchers, says the report `not only reaffirms that both garments involved the same person, but also that, when already a corpse and standing upright, the person suffered a penetrating wound.' Researchers had previously been unsure of the origin of the bloodstains on the Sudarium of Oviedo ... Analysis of the wound also suggested that it had been given to a person who was standing upright. Further examination explains why there were certain stains coming from the nose and mouth. "[W]hen passing through the right lung, the weapon also made its way through the intraparenchymal airways and, as a consequence, part of the organic fluids mentioned were thus opened in an upward trajectory as a result of the intrathoracic pressure caused by the kinetic energy that the advance of the weapon transmitted to the corpse ... These fluids traveled through the upper airways and finally they were also emitted by the mouth and nose of the corpse, causing new spots in these areas in the Sudarium of Oviedo,' he noted. ... Though not as famous as the Shroud of Turin, the Sudarium of Oviedo, which is believed to be the cloth wrapped around the head of Christ, has aroused similar devotion, likewise fostering discussions over its authenticity. The Sudarium of Oviedo has been housed in the cathedral town of Oviedo in northern Spain since the 11th century. The report not only reaffirms that both garments involved the same person, but also that, when already a corpse and standing upright, the person suffered a penetrating wound."[GD17] [Further evidence that the Sudarium of Oviedo is, "the face cloth [soudarion] that had been on Jesus' head" (Jn 20:7)! I have replaced the incorrect "Shroud of Oviedo" with the correct "Sudarium of Oviedo"].

2017b 15 April. "In an interview with RCF Liège, the numismatist

[Left (Enlarge: Agostino Sferrazza's video in French, "Les monnaies du suaire de Turin datent de l'an 29" ("The coins of the Shroud of Turin date from the year 29")

Agostino Sferrazza addressed the old question on the coins that cover the eyes of the Man of the Shroud. According to his conclusions, these pieces must have been coined in the days of Pontius Pilate, circa the year 29 ... This theory is based on the images produced by computer scientist Nello Balossino, an associate professor at the Turin Faculty of Sciences, who succeeded in bringing out an image of the sacrificial cup on the right eye of the Man of the Shroud. According to Agostino Sferazza, there is no doubt: these pieces were indeed coined in 29 AD"[ED17]. And Jesus was crucified in AD 30[DK15]! See my 18Apr20.

2017c 30 June. Publication of journal article, "Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud"[CE17]. "Abstract. We performed reproducible atomic resolution Transmission Electron Microscopy and Wide Angle X-ray Scanning Microscopy experiments studying for the first time the nanoscale properties of a pristine fiber taken from the Turin Shroud. We found evidence of biologic nanoparticles of creatinine bounded with small nanoparticles of iron oxide. The kind, size and distribution of the iron oxide nanoparticles cannot be dye for painting but are ferrihydrate cores of ferritin. The consistent bound of ferritin iron to creatinine occurs in human organism in case of a severe polytrauma. Our results point out that at the nanoscale a scenario of violence is recorded in the funeral fabric and suggest an explanation for some contradictory results so far published"[CE17] See my 19Jul17. The article was later retracted by the editors on the grounds of insufficient controls. But the authors, who included Prof. Giulio Fanti, have stood by their conclusions! Hopefully, further tests on different Shroud samples will resolve this impasse.

2017d 19-22 July. An International Conference on the Shroud of Turin is held in Pasco, Washington, U.S.A. The event is titled, "Seeking Solutions to the Mysteries of the Shroud," sponsored by Mark Antonacci and his "Test the Shroud Foundation" and organized and managed by Robert Rucker (and family).

2018a 3 March. Article, "Doubts about the age of the Shroud. Experts re-open case"[TA18]. "Thirty years after the carbon 14 testing that dated the Shroud, new doubts emerge about the reliability of that result ... A topic that will be discussed by the scientific committee of the International Center of Sindonology at their annual meeting, May 5 and 6 in Chambéry, Savoy ... Paolo Di Lazzaro ... in his speech will remind how `the calculation that transforms the number of C-14 atoms in the age of a fabric' presents `greater uncertainties than in other solid samples (bones, artifacts, etc..) because of the greater permeability of the textile sample to external agents (bacterial digestion, mold, dirt). ... [he] also challenges the resolution with which at the time, the three laboratories involved in the dating, from the columns of `Nature' magazine presented their research as `definitive evidence' ["conclusive evidence"]: such unusual words for a scientific article, given that `over the centuries, science has progressed questioning the results acquired previously'. The number of questions has increased, Di Lazzaro explains, also because the three laboratories that dated the Shroud 30 years ago `have always refused to provide the exact distribution of raw data. This is the only case I know of authors of an article refusing to provide data that would allow other scientists to repeat the calculation and verify whether it was done correctly'. ... Marco Riani, statistician and professor of research techniques and data processing at the University of Parma. Analyzing the data published in `Nature' he had discovered that an age behaved in an anomalous way, as it `constantly increases as you move from one piece to the one right next to it', a fact that `suggests the presence of a contamination that may have distorted the results'. Riani had also discovered that statistical analysis `provides consistent results only by distributing data on three of the four strips of cloth delivered to the laboratories'. This means that only three linen strips were dated in 1988, and one of the two strips delivered to Tucson's laboratory was never actually dated. `As a result - Lazzaro explains - we learn that Nature's article makes false statements: it is not true that all the strips have been dated'. ... `This fact alone - Di Lazzaro concludes - demonstrates ... the lack of transparency and the insufficient professional ethics' with which the dating was performed. ..."[TA18]. Good points. The `body language' of the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud scientists shows that they know their "1260-1390 radiocarbon date was fraudulent!

2018b 22 March. Article, "Shroud of Turin's 3D encoded info -- how'd it get there?"[AM18]. The article doesn't answer that question because the interviewee, computer graphics artist, Ray Downing, doesn't accept the resurrection of Jesus (e.g. John Jackson's "Cloth Collapse Theory") as an explanation, therefore he has no explanation! I only included it

[Above (enlarge): "A cloth draped body conceals the specifics of the individual's features. The Shroud's distance information shown in blue (far right image) can be used to restore some of those details. ©Ray Downing"[AM18].

because of the above computer graphic illustrating the Shroud's 3D information.

2018c 28 March. Article, "This 3D `carbon copy' of Jesus was created using the Shroud of Turin." "`We believe that we have the precise image of what Jesus looked like on this earth,' said Professor Giulio Fanti of the University of Padua. Click here to launch the slideshow.

[Above (enlarge[ML18]): Three-dimensional computer reconstruction of the man on the Shroud from information on the Shroud. His body is fixed by rigor mortis in his final hanging-on-the cross death position. Could an unknown French artist in c. 1355 [see "1389d"] have imagined this, let alone depicted it so realistically? In negative?! (see 22Dec16)]

`This statue is the three-dimensional representation in actual size of the Man of the Shroud, created following the precise measurements taken from the cloth in which the body of Christ was wrapped after the crucifixion,' explains Giulio Fanti, teacher of mechanical and thermal measurements at the University of Padua, who studies the Shroud. Based on his measurements, the professor has created a `carbon copy' in 3D which, he claims, allows him to affirm that these are the true features of the crucified Christ ..." [ML18].

2018d 9 June. Article, "In a recently published article in the Journal of Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences[GE19], a team of scientists led by Emanuela Gualdi and Ursula Thun Hohenstein of the University of Ferrara revealed that they had excavated a 2,000-year-old corpse from an isolated tomb in Gavello, near Venice, in Northern Italy, that showed signs of having been crucified [by nails]. The heel of the skeleton has a hole through it consistent with the kind of injury that would have been sustained during crucifixion. Gualdi told Italian paper

[Above (enlarge[GE19]): Two possible ways the Gavello crucifixion victim could have been affixed by a single nail through his heels.]

Estense that `in [this case] despite the poorly preserved conditions, we could demonstrate the presence of signs on the skeleton that indicate a violence similar to crucifixion.' The fact that the man was buried directly into the ground (instead of a tomb) and without any kinds of grave goods (items that the deceased might need in the hereafter) suggests that the burial was performed without ceremony. It was, in other words, the kind of burial reserved for slaves and criminals"[MC18].

2018e 27 September. Article, "The Chapel of the Turin Shroud, venerated by Catholics as Christ's winding sheet, was officially reopened in Turin Cathedral Thursday after 21 years of restoration work after it was almost completely destroyed by fire. Culture Minister

[Right (Enlarge[TS18]): The dome of the chapel looking up from the inside.]

Alberto Bonisoli cut the ribbon on the entrance to the famed chapel. He was accompanied by Piedmont Governor Sergio Chiamparino, Turin Mayor Chiara Appendino, the director of the Royal Museums Enrica Pagella and the president of the Compagnia di San Paolo, Francesco Profumo. Bonisoli said the restoration of the chapel could be a model for other cities. The restoration cost a total of 30 million euros. The Turin Shroud was moved to another part of the city cathedral during the restoration, and will now be moved back. The Shroud is normally heavily guarded in a bullet-proof, climate-controlled glass case ... A masterpiece of Baroque architecture, designed by the mathematician priest Guarino Guarini [1624-83], the chapel was commissioned in 1668 by the Savoy ducal family to house the linen cloth believed to have wrapped the body of the dead Christ. The chapel is raised up behind the high altar of Turin Cathedral and opens into the state rooms of the royal palace, emphasising the importance of the Holy Shroud to the history and aspirations of the house of Savoy. The origin of the fire that raged throughout the night of 11 April 1997 remains a mystery. It burned especially fiercely because the chapel, which had just been restored, was still full of wooden scaffolding. A dinner for the then secretary-general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, was being held next door in the palace while firemen struggled to break into the bulletproof case containing the relic, which was rescued undamaged. The long delay in restoring the chapel began with a lengthy judicial seizure of the site while fruitless attempts were made to find out whom to blame for the fire"[TS18]. Following the 1997 fire in the Royal Chapel, the Shroud was moved into the adjoining Turin Cathedral and it hasn't been moved back into the Chapel[AB18]. Presumably because, following the 1946 Referendum which abolished the Savoy monarchy and established in its place the Italian Republic, all the property of the monarchy, including the Royal Chapel, became the property of the Italian State[WI10, 275].

2019a 11 June. Article, "The Shroud is not from the medieval era. New studies are needed to know its age."[AD19]. "`The dating of the Shroud carried out in 1988 with radiocarbon is not correct'. It was possible to `finally observe the raw data': they are `inhomogeneous' and therefore the medieval location of the Sacred Linen `is not reliable'. We must `carry out another measurement'. Benedetto Torrisi , economic statistical professor, has no doubts, summarizing the outcome of a conference he organized at the University of Catania in collaboration with the International Center for Studies on the Shroud. And to confirm this result is indirectly precisely one of the three universities that participated in the famous dating with the C-14, that of Oxford. It would not be an absolute novelty, because studies and arguments with this thesis had already been published, in particular by Marco Riani , statistician of the University of Parma; but in the last few months two turns have been recorded. First of all, `the British Museum has finally granted the researcher Tristan Casabianca, following a legal action, the raw data of the measurements made by the laboratories that dated the Shroud with the radiocarbon method', explains Emanuela Marinelli, scholar of the Shroud. Thus the doors were opened for a statistical analysis of the raw data, conducted by Torrisi with Marinelli, Casabianca and Giuseppe Pernagallo. And the investigation `shows that there is a lack of homogeneity between the samples: therefore, one cannot deduce from those measures that the Shroud is medieval'"[AD19]. The laboratories' `body language' and particularly that of the then British Museum's Michael Tite, who wrote the Nature article and "did the statistical analysis":

"I wrote the [Nature] article. I was the person who put it together and circulated it to the labs and they added their bit. In our lab we did the statistical analysis"[MR90, 7]
and was rewarded with the retired Prof. Edward Hall (1924-2001)'s newly endowed Oxford professorship[WI10, 89], shows that they know that they are guilty of "scientific fraud" of at least "making results appear ... more definitive than they really are, or selecting just the `best' data for publication and ignoring those that don't fit":
"The term `scientific fraud' is often assumed to mean the wholesale invention of data. But this is almost certainly the rarest kind of fabrication. Those who falsify scientific data probably start and succeed with the much lesser crime of improving upon existing results. Minor and seemingly trivial instances of data manipulation-such as making results appear just a little crisper or more definitive than they really are, or selecting just the `best' data for publication and ignoring those that don't fit the case-are probably far from unusual in science. But there is only a difference in degree between `cooking' the data and inventing a whole experiment out of thin air"[BW82, 20].
Scientists who have nothing to hide would gladly provide their raw data to statisticians to check that their experimental results were statistically valid. That they didn't, until forced to by Freedom of Information legal action, shows that they know it wasn't!

2019b 20 September. Article, "Gold dust may prove Shroud of Turin existed before carbon-date of 14th century"[BJ19] "A longstanding debate over the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin is hung up over radiocarbon-dating, which places its origins in the 14th century. But if the speculations of two investigators are proven, it could be a golden moment in the history of Shroud research ... Now, two Italian researchers have compared gold particles that have been found on the Shroud to Byzantine coins minted between the 7th and 12th centuries. They claim this is evidence that the Shroud was displayed in the Byzantine capital, Constantinople, some time before it was sacked by Crusaders in 1204. Giulio Fanti and Claudio Furlan of the University of Padua say they tested micro-particles of gold that had been vacuumed from the Shroud. They compared them to the gold found in a set of 32 coins minted in the Byzantine Empire, Medievalists.net reported. `Among the 17 micro-particles coming from the Shroud, five of them are 100% pure gold and could be related to the golden environment in which the Shroud was exhibited before the Byzantine debasement of the XI century,' Fanti and Fulan write in the Journal of Cultural Heritage. `Two of the micro-particles are composed of gold (93–96%) with metallic impurities of silver and copper and could be related to Byzantine coins struck in the period 1028–1078; four of them are composed of gold (70–89%) and could be related to coins struck in the period 1059–1180; one of them is composed of gold (32%) and could be related to a coin struck in 1143–1180 by Emperor Manuel I [1143-80].' Interestingly, Fanti and Fulan found that nine of the fragments had electrum, an alloy of gold and silver with trace amounts of copper that was used in the Byzantine Empire during the 11th and 12th centuries. Fanti and Fulan believe that the Shroud would have been displayed and stored with items made of gold, `or even that people could have rubbed actual coins onto cloth, leaving behind the gold dust,' Medievalists.net says. ... Evaluation of these results, therefore, is compatible with the Shroud’s presence in the Byzantine Empire in the period up to 1204 A.D., as many historical clues indicate"[BJ19]. Shroud sceptics need to explain how the ~4.4 x ~1.1 metre (~14.4 x ~3.6 feet) fine linen cloth they claim was used by an unknown Troyes artist to "cunningly paint," in the time of Bishop Henri de Poitiers (r. 1354–1370), the Shroud image on it, as claimed by Bishop Pierre d'Arcis (r. 1377-1395)[WI79, 267], then why does it have traces of gold and electrum, an alloy of gold, typical of 11th-12th century Byzantine coins, on it?

2019c 24 November. Article, "The Shroud of Turin Was Declared a Fraud. New Research Has Some Asking for a Retrial"[MC19]. For the past 600 years [sic] Christians have venerated the Shroud of Turin as ... a portrait of Jesus, and ... even proof of the reality of the resurrection. Then, in 1988, three laboratories based at top universities performed radiocarbon analysis of some of its threads. The results were collected and collated by the British Museum in London and published in a splashy article in the prestigious Nature magazine that claimed to offer definitive proof that the Shroud was a medieval fraud[DP89]. Oddly the original data was unavailable to researchers. But in 2017, a legal request under the Freedom of Information Act obtained the raw information for the first time. Their results, published recently in Archaeometry[CT19], show that the issue of the dating of the Turin Shroud is far from settled ... in 1987, laboratories in Arizona, Oxford, and Zurich were selected to perform independent tests ... a sample was taken from one corner of the cloth and distributed to the three sets of scientists. The resulting publication declared that there was `conclusive evidence' that the linen of the shroud dates to 1260-1390 CE with 95 percent confidence in those results[DP89, 611]. Since 2005, however, a growing number of scholars have questioned the results of the now 30-year-old tests ... The fact that testing only used samples from one corner of the cloth makes it impossible to know if this is a claim is correct or not. Oddly, though, neither academic institutions involved or the British Museum would respond to requests for the original raw data that were held in their archives ... It was only when Tristan Casabianca made a request under British law that he received a favourable reply. According to his co-authored article in Archaeometry, the British Museum `made all its files [hundreds of pages worth] "not dated or arranged in any order," available' to his team. What Casabianca and co-authors Emanuela Marinelli, Giuseppe Pernagallo, and Benedetto Torrisi discovered is that the results were less conclusive than the Nature article suggests. Casabianca told The Daily Beast that they `examined not only the measurements not included in the Nature article but also the reports and letters from and to the laboratories which mention, for example, foreign material in the samples.' .... What should interest everyone is how hard it was for researchers to obtain copies of the raw data produced during the radiocarbon testing. The British Museum had repeatedly denied requests for the raw data. Bioarchaeologist Dr. Kristina Killgrove, who was not involved in working on the Turin Shroud, told The Daily Beast that `it makes some sense to release info to researchers who want to check it / build on it ... But to refuse to release data is a big red flag.' ... A "big red flag" that the 1989 Nature article was fatally flawed, indeed fraudulent, and should be withdrawn.

2020a 11 April. "Pope welcomes Turin Shroud livestream for those `harshly tried by pandemic'"[CW20]. An Internet exposition of the Shroud, especially for those suffering under a Covid-19 lockdown. See "#HOLYSHROUD2020 - ENG - Contemplation before the Holy Shroud – live streaming in English."

2020b 27 May. Article "`There WAS a body inside' Shroud of Turin oddity discovery exposed in Bible breakthrough"[HC20]. "Rob Walker spoke to Professor Michael Tite, who supervised the [1988 radiocarbon] testing process, during the BBC's Witness History podcast. ... Professor Tite then detailed the process the teams took to date the cloth. He said: `The Shroud was brought out from the chapel behind the Cathedral, it's very rarely brought out, but it was laid out on a large table. ... It didn't mean a great deal to me, I was interested to see it – it's a remarkable image. `A cut was taken from the edge and we had experts present to ensure it was part of the original shroud and not a repair. `It was cut into three pieces, one for each laboratory, wrapped in metal foil and then put in a steel container, and my role was to make sure there was no shady business.' The experiments concluded with a 95 percent confidence that the Shroud's material dated between 1260–1390AD. But, Professor Tite revealed why that was not the end of the argument. ... He added: `To some extent, it confirmed what I expected, my suspicions were proved. `But I did make a mistake at the press conference, there was a big blackboard behind me and I put 1260 - 1390 and an exclamation mark afterwards which caused me endless trouble. `The significance of the exclamation mark was to tell the press that this is what you already knew, but all sorts of various things were read into the exclamation mark.' ... But, Professor Tite admitted there was one `oddity' he discovered during the testing, leading him to believe there was a body inside the Shroud at one point ... `There's no real evidence it was painted on there, and the other oddity is if you look at paintings from the Middle Ages they always paint Christ with the nails going through the palms of the hands. `Whereas in reality, you have to put the nails through the wrist, I think a complete replication of the image has not been achieved. `I don't believe it was the Shroud, but I believe it is highly probable that there was a body in there – it was the time of the Crusades and an appropriate way to humiliate a Christian would be to crucify him"[HC20]. In this obscure article Tite: • Admitted that he put the exclamation mark after the "1260-1390" [see 1988s]; • Agreed that the Shroud is not a painting; • Noted that the nails are in the Shroudman's wrists, but "paintings from the Middle Ages ... always paint Christ with the nails going through the palms of the hands"; • Confirmed that "a complete replication of the image has not been achieved"; • Agreed that "there was a body in there"; and • Claimed that the Shroudman was an unnamed crusader crucified [by Muslims] in "the Crusades." But: • The only crusade compatible with the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud was the "Ninth" or "Lord Edward's crusade (1271-72)." And it would have been well-known in that small crusade if the Muslims had crucified a crusader in imitation of Jesus, but there is no record of it. • The Muslims would have had to be experts in Roman crucifixion. • Where did the Muslims or the victim's fellow crusaders, get a ~4.4 x ~1.1 metre (~14.4 x ~3.6 feet) fine linen cloth to wrap the crusader victim in? • How was the crusader victim's image imprinted on that cloth? For starters!

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]

Bibliography
AB18. Antonetto, B., 2018, "Turin's Chapel of the Holy Shroud - almost entirely destroyed by fire - reopens after €30m restoration," The Art Newspaper, 7 September.
AD19. Agasso, D., 2019, "The Shroud is not from the medieval era. New studies are needed to know its age," Vatican Insider, 11 June.
AM00. "Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.
AM18. Adams, M., 2018, "Shroud of Turin's 3D encoded info -- how'd it get there?," WorldNet Daily, 22 March.
BG15. Barcaccia, G., Galla, G., Achilli, A., Olivieri, A. & Torroni, A., 2015, "Uncovering the sources of DNA found on the Turin Shroud," Nature, Scientific Reports 5, Article no. 14484, 5 October.
BJ19. Burger, J., 2019, "Gold dust may prove Shroud of Turin existed before carbon-date of 14th century," Aleteia, 20 September.
BW82. Broad, W. & Wade, N., 1982, "Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science," Simon and Schuster: New York NY.
CE17. Carlino E., et al., 2017, "Atomic resolution studies detect new biologic evidences on the Turin Shroud," PLoS ONE, 12 (6), June 30.
CT19. Casabianca, T., et al., 2019, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence from Raw Data," Archaeometry, Vol. 61, No. 5, October, 1223-1231.
CW20. "Pope welcomes Turin Shroud livestream for those `harshly tried by pandemic'," Catholic World Report, 11 April .
DE16. Donandoni, E., 2016, "5 minutes with… The earliest painted representation of the Turin Shroud," Christie's, 7 June,
DK15. Doig, K.F., 2015, "New Testament Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus" & "The 30 CE Crucifixion," 22 April.
DT12. de Wesselow, T., "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, 2012.
DP89. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16th February, 611-615.]
ED17. Esparza, D., 2017, "Shroud of Turin coins may finally have been identified," Aleteia, 26 April .
FG12. Fanti, G., et al., "Analysis of micro-particles vacuumed from the Turin Shroud," 1st International Congress on the Holy Shroud in Spain - Valencia," Centro Español de Sindonologia (CES), April 28-30, 2012, Valencia, Spain.
GD17. Ganzhorn, D., 2017, "Groundbreaking Study Shows Spear Wound in Burial Shroud of Christ," ChurchMilitant.com, 3 April.
GE19. Gualdi, E., et al, 2019, "A multidisciplinary study of calcaneal trauma in Roman Italy: a possible case of crucifixion?," Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 11(4), May 2019, Research Gate.
GH96. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK.
HC20. Hoare, C., 2020, "`There WAS a body inside' Shroud of Turin oddity discovery exposed in Bible breakthrough," Daily Express, 27 May.
HEL. ENEA's Hercules-L XeCl excimer laser: ENEA FIS-ACC Excimer Laboratory Annual Report 2000-2001 (no longer online).
HS15. Hazlett, S., 2015, "Hazlett: Seeing Shroud of Turin a life-changing experience," Pantagraph.com, 16 May.
HPG. "Haplogroup," International Society of Genetic Genealogy Wiki, 27 June 2022.
JS12. Jones, S.E., 2012, "Tetradiplon and the Shroud of Turin," Shroud of Turin blog, 15 September.
JS17. Jones, S.E., 2017, "The date of Ian Wilson's tetradiplon = `doubled in four' Shroud experiment," Shroud of Turin blog, 20 January.
MC18. Moss, C., 2018, "New Evidence of How Romans Would Have Crucified Jesus," The Daily Beast, 9 June.
MC19. Moss, C., 2019, "The Shroud of Turin Was Declared a Fraud. New Research Has Some Asking for a Retrial," The Daily Beast, 24 November.
MD12. Murra, D., et al., 2012, "Shroud-like coloration of linen by nanosecond laser pulses in the vacuum ultraviolet," Research Gate, September 2012.
ML18. Massaro, L., 2018, "This 3D `carbon copy' of Jesus was created using the Shroud of Turin," Aleteia, 28 March.
MR90. Morgan, R., 1990, "Interview With Dr. Michael Tite by Orazio Petrosillo and Emanuela Marinelli, 8 September 1989, during the Paris Symposium," Shroud News, No 59, June, 3-9, 7.
PM14. "Principle of AMS," Accelerator Mass Spectrometry Lab: University of Arizona. Accessed 22 February 2014. No longer online.
QR23. "As per e=mc^2 average human body has 7.8 septillion Joules of energy, is there a way to use this energy?," Quora, Accessed 16 September 2023.
RC08. Ramsey, C., 2008, "The Shroud of Turin," Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, March.
SN11. Squires, N., 2011, "Italian study claims Turin Shroud is Christ's authentic burial robe," The Telegraph, 19 December.
SS12. "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection Hardcover – 26 March 2012 by Thomas de Wesselow (Author)," Amazon.com.
TJW. "Transfiguration of Jesus: Transfiguration and Resurrection," Wikipedia, 28 July 2023.
TA13. Tornielli, A., 2013, "New experiments on Shroud show it's not medieval," Vatican Insider, 26 March.
TA18. Tornielli, A., 2018, "Doubts about the age of the Shroud. Experts re-open case," Vatican Insider, 3 May.
TM11. Tosatti, M., 2011, "The Shroud is not a fake," The Vatican Insider, La Stampa, 12 December.
TS18. "Turin Shroud Chapel reopens," ANSA, 27 September 2018.
WI79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition.
WI98. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY.
WI10, Wilson, I., 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London.

Posted 9 September 2023. Updated 17 November 2023.