Sunday, May 24, 2015

"Ga-Gm": Turin Shroud Dictionary

Turin Shroud Dictionary
© Stephen E. Jones[1]


This is the first installment of page "Ga-Gm" of my Turin Shroud Dictionary. I will add further installments over the coming days. For more information about this dictionary see the "Main index A-Z" and page "A."

[Index] [Previous: "Fm-Fz"] [Next: "Gn-Gz"]

[Above: Geoffroy I de Charny's (see below) coat of arms[2] on pilgrim badge from the exposition of the Shroud at Lirey, France, in c.1355 (left). The de Charny coat of arms[3], "gules (red) three silver shields"[4] (right).]

Garza-Valdes, L.A. Dr. Leoncio Antonio Garza-Valdes (1939-2010) was a Mexican-born pediatrician living in San Antonio, Texas, whose hobby was microbiology. To reconcile his belief in the Shroud's authenticity and the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud, Garza-Valdes proposed a theory that the Shroud had an "accretion... of microbiological organisms" which formed a "bioplastic coating" of younger carbon, which gave the 1st century Shroud an apparent 13th-14th century radiocarbon date. In 1993 Garza-Valdes proposed his theory in Turin to physicist Professor Luigi Gonella (1930–2007), who had been the Roman Catholic Church's coordinator of the Shroud's radiocarbon dating. Gonella rejected Garza-Valdes' proposal because to shift the Shroud's radiocarbon date ~12-13 centuries, "the coating would be the weight of the Shroud, and this was not the case"[5]. But Garza-Valdes simply ignored this obvious refutation of his theory and obtained some threads of the Shroud from Giovanni Riggi (1935-2008), which was part of the sample that was cut by him in 1988 but not given to the three laboratories. Back in San Antonio Garza-Valdes claimed to have photographed the bioplastic coating under a microscope. Garza-Valdes gave a bloodstained thread from the Shroud to San Antonia Professor of Microbiology, Stephen J. Mattingly, who gave Assistant Professor in Microbiology, Victor V. Tryon, the task of extracting DNA from the thread. Tryon did extract fragments of three different human male genes from the Shroud blood sample. In 1998 Garza-Valdes published an account of all this in his book, "The DNA of God?" However, as the late blood chemist Prof. Alan D. Adler (1932-2000) pointed out in 1999[5], the DNA could have been from anyone who had handled the Shroud over the centuries. Adler also listed problems with Garza-Valdes's "bioplastic coating" theory: 1) for a bioplastic coating to have shifted the Shroud's 1st century carbon date to the 13-14th century would require "about a 50% increase in the C14," which would be "a prodigious amount of bacterial metabolism"; 2) but "where does all this energy for growth come from?"; 3) "Where does the mass come from?"; 4) "Does this microorganism fix the nitrogen from air as required for its growth and metabolism?," and 5) "Where does it get its sulfur, phosphorus, and minerals from and to where have they disappeared?" Adler further pointed out that the Shroud's shiny appearance that Garza-Valdes thought was a bioplastic coating was in fact what "all linen looks like ... It is called luster," and Garza-Valdes' photomicrographs "of what appear to be entubulated fibers" are "simply out of focus." Note that the same problem of the "prodigious amount" of contamination required to convert a 1st century chronological date of the Shroud to a 13th-14th radiocarbon date, means that conventional explanations of the discrepancy all fail, leaving my theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker as the only viable explanation how the first century Shroud had a 13th-14th century radiocarbon date.

Geoffroy de Charny (c. 1240-1314).
Geoffroy I de Charny (c.1300–1356).
Geoffroy II de Charny.
Gervase of Tilbury

1. This page, and each page in my Turin Shroud Dictionary, is copyright. However, permission is granted to quote from one entry at a time within a page (e.g. "Geoffroy I de Charny," not the whole page "Ga-Gm"), provided a link and/or reference is provided back to the page in this dictionary it came from. [return]
2. Latendresse, M., 2012, "A Souvenir from Lirey," Sindonology. [return]
3. "220px-Blason_famille_fr_Charny_svg," jamielavigne35, Lavigne Family Tree, (members only). [return]
4. Wilson, Ian, 2010, "The Shroud: The 2000-Year-Old Mystery Solved," Bantam Press: London, p.210. [return]
5. Garza-Valdes, L.A., 1998, "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London, p.23. [return]
6. Adler, A.D., 1999, "The Nature of the Body Images on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.103-112. [return]

Created: 24 May, 2015. Updated: 24 May, 2015.

Sunday, May 17, 2015

My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #10: Summary (9)

Copyright ©, Stephen E. Jones[1]

Introduction. This is the seventh and last installment of part #10, Summary (9), of my theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker. See the previous parts #10(1), #10(2), #10(3), #10(4), #10(5), #10(6), #10(7) and #10(8). Other previous posts in this series were parts #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8 and #9, which posts this part #10 will summarise. It is my emphasis below unless otherwise indicated.


[Above[2]: "The hacker Karl Koch was only 23 years old. On 1 June 1989 they found his burnt corpse in a forest near Gifhorn (Lower Saxony)."[3]. As summarised by Wikipedia:

"Karl Werner Lothar Koch (July 22, 1965 – ca. May 23, 1989) was a German hacker in the 1980s, who called himself "hagbard", after Hagbard Celine. He was involved in a Cold War computer espionage incident. ... Koch was born in Hanover. As his moniker would suggest, he was heavily influenced by The Illuminatus! Trilogy by Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea. ... Koch was loosely affiliated with the Chaos Computer Club. He worked with the hackers known as DOB (Dirk-Otto Brezinski), Pengo (Hans Heinrich Hübner), and Urmel (Markus Hess), and was involved in selling hacked information from United States military computers to the KGB. Clifford Stoll's book The Cuckoo's Egg gives a first-person account of the hunt and eventual identification of Hess. Pengo and Koch subsequently came forward and confessed to the authorities under the espionage amnesty, which protected them from being prosecuted. Koch was found burned to death with gasoline in a forest near Celle, Germany. The death was officially claimed to be a suicide. However, some believe there is little evidence supporting suicide and many believe that Koch was killed in order to keep him from confessing more to the authorities. Why Koch would be targeted, and not Pengo and Urmel, is unknown. Koch left his workplace in his car to go for lunch; he had not returned by late afternoon and so his employer reported him as a missing person. Meanwhile, German police were alerted of an abandoned car in a forest near Celle. When they went to investigate, they found an abandoned car, that looked like it had been there for years, as it was covered in dust. Near to the car they found a burned corpse (Koch). His shoes were missing and have never been found. There was a patch of burned ground around him, which although it had not rained in some time and the grass was perfectly dry, was controlled in a small circle around the corpse. It is thought to be highly unlikely that this type of controlled burning could have been achieved by Koch himself which leads many to believe that his death was not suicide."[4].]

• Koch is not essential to my theory. First, as I have previously stated, Karl Koch is not essential to my theory:

"... Koch's role is not essential to my theory. If it turned out that Koch could not possibly have personally travelled to Zurich and Oxford to access their radiocarbon laboratories computers, it would not falsify my theory. My theory includes Koch because of the striking coincidence that they were both allegedly hackers working for the KGB and both allegedly committed suicide within days of each other"[5]

I later discovered that Koch's charred body was identified by German police on 3 June 1989, one day earlier than Linick's `suicide' on 4 June 1989! [see future installment]

"...Karl Koch is not essential to my theory, as Linick could have hacked Zurich and Oxford's AMS computer some other way, e.g. by issuing them with a program `update', or one of the KGB's own operatives could have entered those two laboratories clandestinely and installed Linick's program on their AMS control console computers"[6]

If it turned out that Koch could not possibly have been involved, either directly or indirectly, in installing Linick's program on Zurich and Oxford laboratories' AMS control console computers, then my theory would not be falsified. In that case I would have to maintain that Linick's program was installed on those laboratories' computers by some other way. For example, Linick himself could have flown over to Zurich and Oxford, installed his program clandestinely on their computers, and returned to Arizona, in a few days. This is why my theory always has been "that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker" (singular).

Also, as I have also previously stated, it is not essential to my theory that Linick knew Koch, or even about Koch (and vice-versa):

"... I don't claim that the laboratories, or even Linick, knew about Koch"[7]

I have included Karl Koch in my theory, despite there being as yet no confirmed link between Koch and Linick, because of: 1) the striking coincidence that both Koch and Linick died of suspected suicide within days of each other (and indeed Linick's `suicide' on 4 June 1989 was only one day after Koch charred body was identified and publicly announced as his by German police on 3 June 1989 [see future installment]); 2) Koch's death was almost certainly the work of the KGB, or the East German Secret Police (Stasi)[8] at the behest of the KGB; 3) the KGB had no reason to kill Koch unless he had been involved in an entirely different type of hacking for them which they did not want to become public knowledge; 4) Koch's expertise would have been useful in hacking into Zurich and Oxford's AMS computers; and 5) Koch's living in Germany would have made it comparatively easy for him to travel to Zurich and Oxford to install Linick's program on their computers (although that too is not necessary to my theory as Koch may have only provided expert advice on how to hack into those computers and a KGB operative may have entered the laboratories clandestinely and installed Linick's program on their AMS computers, or Linick himself may have installed it).

So those who continue to dismiss my theory as merely a "conspiracy theory," in the full knowledge of my above disclaimers, do so dishonestly.

• Koch was a German computer hacker in the 1980s. Karl Koch was born in Hanover, West Germany, on 22 July 1965[9]. Both his parents were dead by the time he was 16 and Koch's inheritance supported his expensive drug habit[10]. Koch began computer hacking in Hannover, then West Germany, in the early 1980s[11]. Koch's adopted name was "Hagbard Celine" after the hero of the The Illuminatus! Trilogy[12] novels, who fights against The Illuminati, a fictitious, but to Koch real, all-powerful secret society[13]. Unlike other hackers, Koch was no programmer but was expert at guessing logins and passwords[14]. However what Koch lacked in programming skills he more than made up for by his deep intuition, fertile imagination[15], unusual insight, patience, single-mindedness[16] and persistence[17]. Other hackers were part-time but Koch, supported by his inheritance, devoted every waking moment to hacking[18].

• Koch became a paid hacker for the KGB. In 1985, at a hacker meeting in Hannover, Koch was recruited by a Peter Carl as a the first member of a ring of hackers to break into Western computer systems, particularly those on military or defence industry sites, and sell the information and programs to the KGB[19]. Others who joined Koch in the Hannover KGB hacker circle[20] included Hans Heinrich Hübner (Pengo)[21], Dirk-Otto Brzezinski (DOB)[22] and Markus Hess (Urmel)[23]. In September 1986 Peter Carl went to the Soviet trade mission in East Berlin with a proposition to sell them secret information from USA military computers[24]. A KGB agent, Sergei Markov, agreed to Carl's hacking proposition[25]. At subsequent meetings in East Berlin with Carl and Brzezinski, from 1986 through 1988, Sergei paid for information and software the German hacker ring provided[26].

• Koch allegedly installed Linick's program on Zurich and Oxford's AMS computers. By early 1987, Koch had spent his inheritance and his drug dependency had become acute[27]. It is in this 7 month period between October 1987, after the Archbishop of Turin announced that only three AMS laboratories, Arizona, Oxford and Zurich, would date the Shroud[28] and April 1988 when samples were cut from the Shroud and given to the three laboratories for dating[29], that according to my theory, the KGB's Sergei Markov secretly approached Koch, with an offer of drugs[30] and/or money in return for Koch installing Linick's program on Zurich and Oxford AMS computers. How exactly Koch installed Linick's program on Zurich and Oxford AMS computers is not part of my theory. Except that since Arizona's and Oxford's (and presumably Zurich's) AMS computers were never online[31], Linick's program would have had to be installed manually and locally, either by Koch alone, or by a KGB operative following Koch's instructions, or more likely by a KGB operative taking Koch to each of the two laboratories and helping him gain access to their AMS computers.

The hacking itself would have been easy for the very experienced Koch. In 1987 it was known by hackers (including Koch[32]) that VMS, the operating system for the "DEC computer system" that the AMS control console computer at Arizona[33] (and presumably also at Zurich and Oxford) was, had a major security flaw, in that if an unauthorised user entered any login and password and ignored the error messages, he could gain access to the system:

"Two ... Hamburg students. ... had exploited a devastatingly simple flaw in the VMS operating system used on VAX. The machines, like most computer systems, required users to log in their ID and then type their password to gain access. If the ID or the password was wrong, the VMS system had been designed to show an 'error' message and bar entry. But ... if they simply ignored all the 'error' messages, they could walk straight into the system - provided they continued with the log-on as though everything was in order. When confronted with the 'error' message after keying in a fake ID, they would press `enter', which would take them to the password prompt. They would then type in a phoney password, bringing up a second, equally ineffectual 'error' message. By ignoring it and pressing enter again, they were permitted access to the system. It was breathtakingly easy, and left the VAX open to any hacker, no matter how untalented. ... The VAX operating system, VMS, had been subjected to stringent tests ... It beggared belief that VMS could have gone through such testing without the back door being discovered. [Later, it would be established that although early versions of VMS had been fully tested, later ones hadn't. It was these newer versions that contained the back door. (Users update their computers with the latest versions of the operating systems almost as a matter of course, so nearly all VAXen became insecure for a time.)]"[34].

And even when "Digital issued a 'mandatory patch' ... in May 1987. ... many users didn't bother to install it"

"Responding to complaints from its users, Digital issued a 'mandatory patch', a small program designed specifically to close the back door, in May 1987. Despite the 'mandatory' tag, many users didn't bother to install it. So, at least for a time, VAX computers across the world provided hackers with an open house ..."[35].

And a good reason why many system managers did not install DEC's `mandatory patch" is that DEC were: "being real quiet about it. They don't want their customers to panic" (see below).

Indeed, in the "NASA hack," in which both Hess and Koch were involved[36], it was found that "DEC's [VMS] installation procedure works only" for a "SYSTEM account" but "most system managers do not change the preset default password MANAGER" and those who did change it used easy-to-guess passwords:

"In Hess' apartment, public prosecutors found (on March 3, 1989) password lists from other hacks. On Monday, March 6, 1989, the Panorama team (who had disclosed the NASA hack and basically the KGB connection) asked Klaus Brunnstein to examine some of the password lists; the material which he saw (for 30 minutes) consisted of about 100 photocopied protocols of a hack during the night of July 27 to 28, 1987; it was the famous `NASA hack.' From a VAX 750 (with VMS 4.3) ... to log-into other VAXes in remote institutes. They always used SYSTEM account and the `proper' password (invisible). ... DEC's installation procedure works only if a SYSTEM account is available; evidently, most system managers do not change the preset default password MANAGER; since Version 4.7, MANAGER is excluded, but on previous VMS versions, this hole probably exists in many systems! ... the hackers, in more than 40% of the cases, succeeded to login, their first activities were to ... to install ... the Trojan horse. With the Trojan horse ... they copied the password lists to their PCs. When looking through the password list, Klaus observed the well-known facts: More than 25% female or male first names, historical persons, countries, cities, or local dishes ... the password lists contained less than 5% passwords of such nature easy to guess!"[37].

And if the AMS laboratories' VMS was the very popular version 4.5, then "Anyone that logs into the system can become system manager by running a short program":

"Now if you want a tasty security hole, check out VMS. They've got a hole you could drive a truck through.' `Huh?' `Yeah. It's in every Vox computer from Digital Equipment Corporation that runs the VMS operating system Version 4.5.' `What's the problem?' Darren explained. 'Anyone that logs into the system can become system manager by running a short program. You can't stop 'em.' I hadn't heard of this problem. 'Isn't DEC doing something about it? After all, they sell those systems.' `Oh, sure, they're sending out patches. But they're being real quiet about it. They don't want their customers to panic.' `Sounds reasonable.' `Sure, but nobody's installing those patches. What would you do-some tape shows up in the mail saying, `Please install this program or your system may develop problems' ... you'll ignore it, because you've got better things to do.' `So all the systems are open to attack?' `You got it.' `Wait a second. That operating system was certified by NSA. They tested it and certified it secure.' `Sure they spent a year testing it. And a month after they verified the system, DEC modified it slightly. Just a little change in the password program.' ... `And now fifty thousand computers are insecure.'"[38].

So it would be likely the Zurich and Oxford's AMS computers, not being online, were among the many VAX computers which were not patched. And in the "more than 40% of the cases" where the System password was still set to its default "MANAGER." And among the 95% whose passwords were easy to guess!

Hacking into such insecure 1980s computers would be easy for a very experienced hacker as Koch was. It may be significant that in late 1987/early 1988 Sergei wanted Koch excluded from the KGB hacking ring because of his drug-taking and talking to journalists for money[39]. But there is no evidence that Koch's talking was the source of any of the news stories about the KGB's hacking, so perhaps Sergei's real concern was that Koch would talk about his hacking of Zurich and Oxford radiocarbon dating laboratories' computers?

• Koch confessed to hacking for the KGB. Following a period of treatment in psychiatric hospitals and drug rehabilitation centers[40], Koch was on the road to recovery[41]. In June 1987, due to Clifford Stoll's persistence, American and German authorities cooperated in tracing his Hess' modem call from Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories in California to his apartment in Hannover, Germany, but due to a police bungle, Hess was not caught in the act of hacking as planned[42], and although he was arrested and charged, Hess was later released on appeal[43]. A year later, in the summer of 1988, first Koch, then Hübner, independently, taking advantage of an amnesty provision for espionage in West German legislation, approached the authorities to confess their hacking for the KGB[44]. Both were interrogated by West German prosecutors[45], and on 2 March 1989 eight were arrested, including Hess, Hübner, Koch, Brescinsky and Carl, but all except Carl and Brescinsky were released after a few days[46]. Koch and Hübner, having confessed to espionage before they were caught, under the espionage amnesty legislation were in no danger of being jailed providing they co-operated[47].

• Koch was murdered between 23 and 30 May 1989. Before noon on 23 May 1989, Koch left his workplace at the Hannover office of Germany's Christian Democratic Union party, in his employer's vehicle, to deliver a package to a government office in Hannover, but he never arrived[48]. In the late afternoon, Koch's employer notified the police of his disappearance[49]. Koch's friends and the German domestic security agency (BFV) sent out search parties looking for Koch but after a week the searches were abandoned[50]. On 30 May a farmer who had been checking his irrigation daily noticed a car parked in the adjoining forest[51] near the village of Ohof, north of Hannover[52]. After a few days in a row, when he saw that the car was still there, he called the police[53], on 1 June. The police investigated the report that day and found that the car's roof, hood and windscreen were thick with dust[54], looking like it had been there for years[55]. In the undergrowth near the car, the police found a charred corpse lying next to an empty gasoline can[56]. He was lying face down with an arm over his head as though trying to shield himself from the flames[57]. The vegetation in the surrounding three or four metres had been burned black[58]. The police concluded that the driver of the car

[Above: Partially burnt forest trees from the gasoline fire that killed Karl Koch[59]. Note that a fire which can partly burn "dry as matchwood" trees would not go out until all the wood was burned, unless it was controlled by one or more persons using fire extinguishers or hoses. Buckets of water would not put out a gasoline fire. But Koch couldn't have extinguished the gasoline fire that killed him and there were no fire extinguishers or hoses left at the scene. Therefore Koch's death was murder, not suicide!.]

had committed suicide[60] by pouring the contents of the gasoline can over himself, soaking the surrounding earth as well, lit a match, and was burned to death[61]. The police noted that the corpse was barefoot but no shoes were found in the car or in the surrounding area[62]. They were puzzled, because there had been no rain for five weeks and the undergrowth was as dry as matchwood, yet the scorched patch around the body was contained, as if it had been carefully controlled[63]. The body was on 3 June 1989[64] publicly identified by the police as that of Karl Koch[65]. But if Koch had committed suicide

[Above (enlarge): Timeline between: a. Koch's disappearance on 23 May 1989[66]; b. a farmer first noticing on 30 May what turned out to be Koch's work vehicle parked in the adjoining forest[67]; c. police responding to the farmer's report found a burnt body near the vehicle[68]; d. police identification on 3 June of the body as that of Koch[69]; and e. Linick's `suicide' a day later on 4 June[70].]

by pouring gasoline over himself and then setting it alight, he could not then have been able to control the fire that killed him to prevent it spreading outside the confined perimeter[71]. Koch would have been wearing shoes when he left his office in the car, but they weren't in the car or the surrounding area[72]. And no suicide note was found.[73].

Moreover, suicide made no sense, since Koch had confessed to the German authorities his selling of hacked Western computer secrets to the KGB[74]. He was therefore in no danger of being prosecuted, being protected from punishment by the terms of the espionage amnesty legislation[75]. The authorities had actually provided Koch with accommodation and found him a job with the Christian Democratic Party[76]. He was also receiving help with his drug dependency and seemed on his way to rehabilitation[77] Koch was even planning to move into an apartment of his own and had embraced conventional religion[78]. So even on those grounds (apart from the impossibility of Koch extinguishing, with no fire extinguisher or hose, the gasoline fire which killed him) murder was much more likely than suicide[79].

When the Nature paper announced on 16 February 1989 that the Shroud had in 1988 been dated by radiocarbon "laboratories at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich" as "mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390"[80], it was world news. Koch who was employed by the Christian Democratic Party, and had "embraced conventional religion," i.e. Christianity, would have heard about it, either from the news media, or from his Christian friends. If Koch knew that he had in 1988 hacked two computers in laboratories at Zurich and Oxford universities, even if he did not know what their function was, he would have `put two and two together' and realised that the "mediaeval" carbon date of the Shroud was partly the result of his hacking. In which case if Koch then told his Christian friends about it, the KGB would have learnt of it, which would explain why the KGB would have permanently silenced Koch, and then Linick the day after Koch's burnt body was publicly identified on 3 June 1989!

To be continued in part #10, Summary (10).

1. This post is copyright. No one may copy from this post or any of my posts on this my The Shroud of Turin blog without them first asking and receiving my written permission. Except that I grant permission, without having to ask me, for anyone to copy the title and one paragraph only (including one associated graphic) of any of my posts, provided that if they repost it on the Internet a link to my post from which it came is included. See my post of May 8, 2014. [return]
2. Photo, "In memory of Karl Koch. Hagbard Celine. 22.7.1965. 23.05.1989." Translated by Google. [return]
3. Clauss, U., 2012, "Ancestor of the Pirate Party was charred in the forest," Die Welt, 25 May 2012. Translated by Google. [return]
4. "Karl Koch (hacker)," Wikipedia, 28 January 2015. Footnotes omitted. Two links added. [return]
5. Jones, S.E., 2014, "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #1," The Shroud of Turin blog, May 24. [return]
6. Jones, S.E., 2014, "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #5," The Shroud of Turin blog, June 13. [return]
7. Jones, S.E., 2014, "My theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker #7," The Shroud of Turin blog, July 5. [return]
8. Clough. B. & Mungo, P., 1992, "Approaching Zero: Data Crime and the Computer," Faber & Faber: London & Boston, p.185. [return]
9. Wikipedia, 2015. [return]
10. Hafner, K. & Markoff, J., 1991, "Cyberpunk: Outlaws and Hackers on the Computer Frontier," Corgi: London, reprinted, 1993, p.207. [return]
11. Clough & Mungo, 1992, pp.164-165. [return]
12. Shea, R. & Wilson, R.A., 1975, "The Illuminatus! Trilogy," Dell: New York NY. [return]
13. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.206. [return]
14. Ibid. [return]
15. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.206-207. [return]
16. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.216. [return]
17. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.214. [return]
18. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.215. [return]
19. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.164. [return]
20. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.208. [return]
21. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.209, 185. [return]
22. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.209. [return]
23. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.211. [return]
24. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.224. [return]
25. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.225, 293. [return]
26. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.230-231, 239-240, 245, 249, 250, 254, 260. [return]
27. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.266. [return]
28. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, pp.213-214. [return]
29. Gove, 1996, pp.260-261. [return]
30. King, T., ed., 1989a, "Computer Espionage: Three `Wily Hackers' Arrested," Phrack Magazine, Issue #25, March 3. [return]
31. Jones, S.E., 2014, "Were the radiocarbon dating laboratories duped by a computer hacker?: My replies to Dr. Timothy Jull and Prof. Christopher Ramsey," The Shroud of Turin blog, March 13. [return]
32. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.173. [return]
33. Linick, T.W., et al., 1986, "Operation of the NSF-Arizona accelerator facility for radioisotope analysis and results from selected collaborative research projects," Radiocarbon, Vol. 28, No. 2a, pp.522-533, 524. [return]
34. Clough & Mungo, 1992, pp.170-172, 228n5. [return]
35. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.172. [return]
36. Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.362. [return]
37. King, T., ed., 1989b, "News From The KGB/Wily Hackers," Phrack Magazine, Issue #25, March 7. [return]
38. Stoll, 1989, pp.341-342. [return]
39. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.254, 266. [return]
40. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.283. [return]
41. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.185. [return]
42. Stoll, 1989, p.363. [return]
43. Ibid. [return]
44. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.184. [return]
45. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.172. [return]
46. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.184. [return]
47. Clough & Mungo, 1992, pp.183-184. [return]
48. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
49. Ibid. [return]
50. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.302-303. [return]
51. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.303. [return]
52. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
53. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.303. [return]
54. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
55. Karl Koch (hacker)," Wikipedia, 30 May 2014. [return]
56. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
57. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.303. [return]
58. Ibid. [return]
59. "Cliff Stoll visiting Karl Koch's death forest," FirstPost, 2014. [return]
60. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
61. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.303. [return]
62. Ibid. [return]
63. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
64. King, T., ed., 1989c, "One of Cliff Stoll's `Wily Hackers' Is Dead (Suicide?)," Phrack Magazine, June 5. This 5th June Phrack Magazine report states that Koch died on 3 June, evidently wrongly assuming at the time that Koch had died the same day that the police publicly identified his body. [return]
65. Ibid. [return]
66. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.163; Hafner & Markoff, 1991, pp.302-303. [return]
67. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p. 303. [return]
68. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.163; Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.303. [return]
69. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
70. Galeazzi, G., 2013. "Never solved: The enigma that still divides the Church: The Shroud," Vatican Insider, 1 April. Translated from Italian by Google. See English translation, "Unsolved Enigma that Still Divides the Church: The Shroud." [return]
71. Clough, & Mungo, 1992, p.163. [return]
72. Ibid. [return]
73. Stoll, 1989, p.362. [return]
74. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.185. [return]
75. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.186. [return]
76. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.185. [return]
77. Ibid. [return]
78. Hafner & Markoff, 1991, p.302. [return]
79. Clough & Mungo, 1992, p.185. [return]80. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16th February, pp. 611-615. [return]

Created: 17 May, 2015. Updated: 23 May, 2015.

Saturday, May 16, 2015

"Fn-Fz": Turin Shroud Dictionary

Turin Shroud Dictionary
© Stephen E. Jones[1]


This is page "Fn-Fz" of my Turin Shroud Dictionary. For more information about this dictionary see the "Main index A-Z" and page "A."

[Index] [Previous: "Fa-Fm"] [Next: "Ga-Gm"]

[Right: Max Frei-Sulzer [2] (see below), with STURP's Ray Rogers (1927–2005) looking on, taking pollen samples from the Shroud in 1978, in conjunction with (but not part of) STURP's investigation of the Shroud.]

face-cloth (see sudarium)

fold marks
Fourth Crusade

Frei-Sulzer, Max. Max Frei-Sulzer (1913-83) was an eminent Swiss criminologist, with a doctorate in Botany. Frei was an expert in Mediterranean flora, his doctoral thesis having been on the flora of Sicily. Frei was the founder and for ~24 years from 1948 to his retirement in 1972, Director of the Criminology Department of Switzerland's police. Frei was a pioneer of forensic science, and in particular the use of pollen in proving accused persons at the scene of a crime. This is because pollen grains are microscopic and have a surface structure, size and shape which is unique to the species of plant they come from. Although he was a Protestant with no interest in relics, in 1973 Frei was appointed the Turin Commission on the Shroud to verify the authenticity of photographs of the Shroud submitted to it in 1969. While examining the Shroud, Frei noticed there was dust on its surface. Frei knew that pollen on the Shroud could indicate which geographic region it had been in. Frei had developed the tape uplift method of collecting trace evidence which was a major advance in forensic science and still used today. Frei was permitted to take samples of dust from the Shroud by his sticky tape method for private analysis. The Shroud was hanging vertically so Frei could only take samples from the frontal foot end. Back in Zurich, in the following years, Frei identified a total of 48 different varieties of pollen-grains from the Shroud. In 1978 Frei obtained further dust samples containing pollen from the Shroud. Frei extracted the pollen grains from the sticking-tape, cleaned them, and studied them from all sides under an optical microscope. But Frei had only limited success obtaining pollen-grains or their photographs to compare with the Shroud pollen. So Frei undertook a systematic study of the pollen of plants growing in countries where the Shroud, if it was authentic, might have been. He realised that a positive identification of such pollens would be a confirmation of the Shroud's stay in that particular botanical region. So from 1974 to 1978, Frei undertook seven field trips in different flowering seasons through Palestine, Turkey, Cyprus, France and Italy, for direct comparison under the microscope. Frei was successful in that the number of unidentified pollens steadily diminished. However Frei found that it was necessary to study the tiniest details of pollen structure under s scanning electron microscope (SEM), which he did, with the help of laboratories at Vercelli, Italy and Zurich, Switzerland. Frei's summary of results included his identification of 56 different varieties of pollen on the Shroud, although presumably due to 2 later additions there were 58. These fell into the categories of: A. Desert plants, from sand deserts or halophytes (16 species). The latter grow in soils with a high concentration of salt. These plants grow around the Dead Sea but are completely missing in Italy and France. So "they could not have contaminated the Shroud during the last six centuries of its known history" (my emphasis). B. Plants of rocky hills and stony places (ruins) in Palestine and neighboring countries (7 species). C. Mediterranean plants, which grow in Palestine as well as in France and Italy (16 species). D. Plants from Anatolia, mostly steppic plants (16 [6 unique] species). These grow in the Near East, from Iran to the Eastern Mediterranean. "The contamination of the Shroud with these pollens could not have happened in Europe. They are strong evidence for the Shroud's stay in Edessa as theorised by Ian Wilson and others" (my emphasis). E. Plants growing near. A few plants in groups B, C and D can be found also around Constantinople (today Istanbul). Also one species of pollen on the Shroud, Epimedium pubigerum DC, has a more local distribution around Constantinople (Istanbul) and does not grow in the Near East nor in Western or Middle Europe, but only in Turkey and adjacent Bulgaria. These confirm the Shroud's stay at Constantinople. F. Plants widely distributed in Central Europe or cosmopolitans (12 species). These all grow in France and Italy where the Shroud has been for the last six centuries, and exposed in open public exhibitions. Frei therefore concluded:

"Groups A, B and C of plants on the Shroud from Palestine and Anatolia are so numerous, compared to the species from Europe, that a casual contamination or a pollen-transport from the Near East by storms in different seasons cannot be responsible for their presence, as I have explained in several conferences and publications. The predominance of these pollens must be the result of the Shroud's stay in such countries where these plants form part of the normal vegetation. A transport by migrating birds or a contamination with desert plants by pilgrims can be excluded because they had no possibility of a direct contact with the Shroud. ...."
Since the Shroud has never been outside Europe since the mid-14th century, even one of these non-European pollens on the Shroud would be a problem for the medieval forgery theory and the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud. Frei also collected pollen from the Sudarium of Oviedo and confirmed its historical route from Jerusalem through North Africa and into Spain. Regrettably Frei died unexpectedly in 1983, before he could finish and publish his pollen research. In 1990 Dr. Alan Whanger reported he had found images of 28 different flowers and plants on the Shroud, 25 of which were among the pollens identified by Frei. Whanger's flower images and indirectly Frei's pollen identifications were later confirmed by Professor Avinoam Danin a world authority on the flora of Israel, reinforcing Frei's claims that the Shroud has been in Israel. Frei's pollen identifications have had a mixed reception from palynologists. In 1983, Israel's leading pollen expert, Dr. Aaron Horowitz, after reading Frei's 1982 article in Shroud Spectrum International, stated that Frei's work was sound. Israeli palynologist Uri Baruch in 1998 studied Frei's pollen slides held by Whanger's Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin. Within a restricted protocol that Frei's pollens were not to be damaged or destroyed, Baruch found that of 34 pollen grains reported at the species level by Frei, 3 (Gundelia tournefortii, Ricinus communis, and Lomelosia [Scabiosa] prolifera) were correct. But he found that all Frei’s determinations are correct at the higher taxonomical level. However, in 2001 palynologist Thomas Litt was unable to confirm Frei's identifications due to their covering of sticky tape wax. But Frei had, unlike Baruch and Litt, painstakingly extracted his pollens from the sticky tape, cleaned them, and compared them with pollens from present-day plants. But Frei's Shroud pollens that he had had extracted, cleaned and examined, were evidently never handed over to ASSIST by Frei's widow and now cannot be found. Turin botany professor, the late Silvano Scannerini (1940-2005), who, while critical of aspects of Frei's writings, nevertheless concluded that Frei's "pollens [are] of plants from the Near East [and so] are an indirect confirmation of the plausibility of the voyage of the Shroud from Asia to Europe"[3]. Extreme anti-authenticists Joe Nickell and Steven Schafersman have attempted to destroy Frei's reputation after his death, when he no longer could answer them. They accused Frei of fraud because STURP did not find much pollen on the Shroud. But Frei who, unlike STURP, was an expert at collecting pollen, pressed his sticky tape deep into the Shroud's fibres, while STURP used a pressure limiting applicator. Also Frei wrongly identified the "Hitler Diaries'" handwriting as authentic, when they were later found, on other evidence, to be forged. But this had nothing to do with Frei's identification of pollens, which unlike handwriting, was his specialty. That Frei was no fraudster is self-evident in the enormous amount of painstaking work he did over a long period of time, delaying publication for many years until he had gathered sufficient evidence. If Frei had been a fraudster he would have published quickly to enjoy the glory. Evidence that Frei was not a fraudster is evident in his admission that he had been unable to identify any pollens on the Shroud which supported its transfer from Constantinople to Europe:
"So far I have not found any evidence for the Shroud's presence in Cyprus or other regions touched during the transfer from Constantinople to France and Italy."
If Frei had been a fraudster he would have manufactured that evidence. So there is no good reason to doubt Frei's main conclusion:
"The pollen-spectrum as described leaves no room for the hypothesis of a medieval fake painted in France. On the contrary, the pollen-deposits are a most valuable confirmation of the theory that the Shroud traveled from Palestine through Anatolia to Constantinople, France and Italy."

1. This page, and each page in my Turin Shroud Dictionary, is copyright. However, permission is granted to quote from one entry at a time within a page (e.g. "Frei-Sulzer, Max," not the whole page "F"), provided a link and/or reference is provided back to the page in this dictionary it came from. [return]
2. Schwortz, B., "The 1978 Scientific Examination,", photograph [return]
3. de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.114. [return]

Created: 7 May, 2015. Updated: 24 May, 2015.

Thursday, May 14, 2015

My Shroud of Turin books and articles

My Shroud of Turin books and articles

This is the sixth installment (K-L) of a list of my Shroud of Turin-related books and printed articles, in alphabetical order of authors' surnames. I will add further installments as time permits. Books that are not primarily about the Shroud are marked with an asterisk (*). For a more comprehen- sive list of Shroud-related

[Right: Stevenson & Habermas' "Verdict on the Shroud" (1981), my first Shroud book, which began the process of persuading me that the Shroud is authentic.]

books see's "Shroud of Turin Booklist." I have included a link to's (or another bookseller's) listing of each book, where available. I am happy to answer questions in comments below about any item in this list. I will add Shroud-related books and printed articles to this list as I acquire them.


A [top]
Adams, F.O., 1982, "Sindon: A Layman's Guide to the Shroud of Turin," Synergy Books: Tempe AZ.
Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy.
Allday, J., 2005, "The Turin Shroud," Physics Education, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp.67-73.
Angier, N., 1982, "Unraveling the Shroud of Turin," Discover, Vol. 3, No. 10, October, pp.54-60.
Antonacci, M., 2000, "The Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY.

B [top]
Badde, P., 2012, "The True Icon: From the Shroud of Turin to the Veil of Manoppello," [2010], Miller, M.J., transl., Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA.
Baima-Bollone, P. & Zaca, S., 1998, "The Shroud Under the Microscope: Forensic Examination," Neame, A., transl., St Pauls: London.
Barberis, B., 2010, "The Holy Shroud," Editrice VELAR: Gorle, Belgium.
Barberis, B. & Savarino, P., 1998, "Shroud, Carbon-Dating and Calculus of Probabilities," Neame, A., transl., St Pauls: London.
Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963.
Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London.
Beecher, P.A., 1928, "The Holy Shroud: Reply to the Rev. Herbert Thurston, S.J.," M.H. Gill & Son: Dublin.
Bennett, J., 2001, "Sacred Blood, Sacred Image: The Sudarium of Oviedo: New Evidence for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin," Ignatius Press: San Francisco CA.*
Berard, A., ed., 1991, "History, Science, Theology and the Shroud," Symposium Proceedings, St. Louis Missouri, June 22-23, 1991, The Man in the Shroud Committee of Amarillo, Texas: Amarillo TX.
Berkovits, I., 1969, "Illuminated Manuscripts in Hungary, XI-XVI Centuries," Horn, Z., transl., West, A., rev., Irish University Press: Shannon, Ireland.*
Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 1978, "The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London.
Borkan, M., "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter 1995, pp.18-51.
Bowman, S., 1990, "Radiocarbon Dating," Interpreting the Past, British Museum Publications: London.*
Brown, S. & McCloud, C., 2013, "The Shroud of Turin Speaks for Itself," LAMP: Mt. Aukum, CA.
Bruce, R. & Wilson, I., 1983, "Jesus and the Shroud. A Resource Book for Religious Studies," Cassell Publications: London, Reprinted, 1988.
Brucker, E., 1998, "Thy Holy Face: My 39 Years of Lecturing on the Shroud of Turin," Brucker: Tucson AZ.
Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI.

C [top]
Calvin, J., Nickell, J., "Introduction," 2008, "Treatise on Relics," 1543, Prometheus Books: Amherst NY.*
Carreño, J.L., 1980, "A Mini-Guide to the Shroud of Christ," Salesian Publishers: New Rochelle NY.
Case, T.W., 1996, "The Shroud of Turin and the C-14 Dating Fiasco," White Horse Press: Cincinnati OH.
Cassanelli, A., 2002, "The Holy Shroud," Williams, B., transl., Gracewing: Leominster UK.
Cherf, W.J., ed., 1993, "Alpha to Omega: Studies in Honor of George John Szemler," Ares Publishers: Chicago IL.*
Cheshire, G.L., 1956, "Pilgrimage to the Shroud," McGraw-Hill: New York NY.
Cheshire, G.L., 1961, "The Face of Victory," Hutchinson: London.*
Cruz, J.C., 1984, "Relics: The Shroud of Turin, the True Cross, the Blood of Januarius ...: History, Mysticism, and the Catholic Church," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN.*
Culliton, B.J., 1978, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin Challenges 20th-Century Science," Science, Vol. 201, 21 July, pp.235-239.
Currer-Briggs, N., 1995, "Shroud Mafia: The Creation of a Relic?," Book Guild: Sussex UK.
Currer-Briggs, N., 1984, "The Holy Grail and the Shroud of Christ: The Quest Renewed," ARA Publications: Maulden UK.
Currer-Briggs, N., 1988, "The Shroud and the Grail: A Modern Quest for the True Grail," St. Martin's Press: New York NY.

D [top]
Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16th February, pp.611-615.
Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel.
Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO.
de Charny, G., Kaeuper, R.W., 2005, "Introduction," , "A Knight's Own Book of Chivalry," [c. 1350], Kennedy, E., transl., The Middle Ages Series, University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia PA.
de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London.
Dobson, C.C., 1933, "The Face of Christ: Earliest Likenesses from the Catacombs," Centenary Press: London.*
Drews, R., 1984, "In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins," Rowman & Allanheld: Totowa NJ.

E [top]
Elwell, W.A., ed., 1984, "Evangelical Dictionary of Theology," Baker Book House: Grand Rapids MI., 1990, Seventh printing, pp.1115-1116.*

F [top]
Fanti, G., ed., 2009, "The Shroud of Turin: Perspectives on a Multifaceted Enigma," Proceedings of the 2008 Columbus Ohio International Conference, August 14-17, 2008, Progetto Libreria: Padua, Italy.
Fanti, G. & Basso, R., 2008, "Turin Shroud: Optical Research in the Past Present and Future," Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY.
Fattorini, F., 1966, "The Holy Shroud and What it Means," Rose Education Publishers: Newark NJ.
Filas, F.L., 1980, "The Dating of the Shroud of Turin from Coins of Pontius Pilate," Cogan Productions: Youngtown AZ.
Fox, L.D., 1956, "The Holy Shroud," Catholic Truth Society: London.
Frean, W., 1961, "The Winding Sheet of Christ: Vivid Witness of the Love and Sufferings of Our Saviour," Majellan Press: Wendouree VIC, Australia.

G [top]
Garza-Valdes, L.A., 1998, "The DNA of God?," Hodder & Stoughton: London.
Geisler, N.L., 1999, "Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics," Baker Books: Grand Rapids MI, pp.705-706.*
Gove, H.E., 1999, "From Hiroshima to the Iceman: The Development and Applications of Accelerator Mass Spectrometry," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK.*
Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK.
Green, M., 1969, "Enshrouded in Silence: In search of the First Millennium of the Holy Shroud," Ampleforth Journal, Vol. 74, No. 3, Autumn, pp.319-345.
Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL.
Guscin, M., 2004, "The History of the Sudarium of Oviedo: How It Came from Jerusalem to Northern Spain in the Seventh Century A.D., Edwin Mellen Press: Lewiston NY.*
Guscin, M., 2009, "The Image of Edessa," Brill: Leiden, Netherlands & Boston MA.*
Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK.*

H [top]
Habermas, G.R., 1984, "Ancient Evidence for the Life of Jesus," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, pp.156-159.*
Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA.
Heller, J.H., 1984, "Shroud of Mystery," Reader's Digest, British edition, Vol. 124, No. 744, April, pp.156-191.
Hoare, R., 1984, "A Piece of Cloth: The Turin Shroud Investigated," The Aquarian Press: Wellingborough, Northamptonshire UK.
Hoare, R., 1978, "Testimony of the Shroud," St. Martin's Press: New York NY.
Hoare, R., 1999, "The Turin Shroud Is Genuine: The Irrefutable Evidence Updated," [1984], Souvenir Press: London.
Hulse, T.G., 1997, "The Holy Shroud," Mysteries of the Ancient World, Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London.
Humber, T., 1974, "The Fifth Gospel: The Miracle of the Holy Shroud," Pocket Books: New York NY.
Humber, T., 1978, "The Sacred Shroud," [1974], Pocket Books: New York NY.
Hynek, R.W., 1951, "The True Likeness," [1946], Sheed & Ward: London.

I [top]
Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY.
Iannone, J.C., 2010, "The Three Cloths of Christ: The Emerging Treasures of Christianity," NorthStar Production Studios & Lulu Press: Kissimmee FL.*

J [top]
Jeffrey, G.R., 1999, "Jesus: The Great Debate," Frontier Research Publications: Toronto ON, Canada, pp.113-158.*
Jennings, P., ed., 1978, "Face to Face with the Turin Shroud," Mayhew-McCrimmon: Great Wakering UK.
Jumper, E., Stevenson, K. & Jackson, J., "Images of Coins on a Burial Cloth?," The Numismatist, July 1978, Vol. 91, No. 7, pp.1349-1357.*

K [top
Kersten, H. & Gruber, E.R., 1994, "The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection," Element Books: Shaftesbury UK, Reprinted, 1995.
Konikiewicz, L.W., 1999, "Turin Shroud and the Science: Digital Enhancement Provides New Evidence," Panorama Publishing:, Chicago IL.

L [top]
Laidler, K., 2000, "The Divine Deception: The Church, the Shroud and the Creation of a Holy Fraud," Headline: London.*
Lambert, J.B., ed., 1984, "Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry, No. 205," American Chemical Society, Washington DC, pp.425-476.*
Lavoie, G.R., 1998, "Unlocking the Secrets of the Shroud," Thomas More: Allen TX.
Lavoie, G.R., 2000, "Resurrected: Tangible Evidence That Jesus Rose from the Dead," [1998], Thomas More: Allen TX.

Created: 14 May 2015. Updated: 20 May 2015.

Saturday, May 9, 2015

Shroud of Turin News - May 2015

[Previous: April 2015] [Next: June 2015]

Here is the May 2015 issue of my re-started Shroud of Turin News. I will add Shroud-related news articles to this post, latest uppermost, with my comments in bold. This next item is out of date order, but I will later re-sort it and any other such articles into reverse chronological order. There will usually be overlap, e.g. there are excerpts from April Shroud articles in this May issue.

"Is the Shroud of Turin real? Some say it doesn't matter," Crux, Inés San Martín, Vatican correspondent, April 23, 2015. ROME - When Pope ["The Holy Shroud, the 14 foot-long linen revered by some as the burial cloth of Jesus, is on display during a preview for the press at the Cathedral of Turin, Italy, on Saturday, April 18, 2015. (AP Photo/Antonio Calanni)"] ... And now, for the fourth time since 2000, the shroud is on public display until June 24 in Turin's cathedral, and Pope Francis will venerate the shroud during his June 21-22 visit to the city. But even with a papal visit on the horizon, some still doubt the shroud's veracity. Joe Nickell, for instance, who describes himself as the world's only full-time paranormal investigator, says it's a hoax from the Middle Ages cooked up either to sell relics or to impress infidels. Nickell is a "full-time," i.e. professional sceptic. He makes a living debunking Christianity in general and the Shroud in particular. So for Nickell to admit what the evidence overwhelmingly shows, that the Shroud is authentic, would mean that he would be out of a job. "What I or anyone else believes about the Shroud of Turin is beside the point," Nickell told Crux via e-mail. "At issue should be the evidence, and on that basis science has shown the Shroud of Turin to be - like so many alleged relics - a medieval fake." The evidence is overwhelming that the Shroud is authentic. Nickell is a modern example of those whom Jesus called, `the blind leading the blind' (Mt 15:14; Lk 6:39). An example of Nickell's dishonesty (or self-delusion) in Shroud matters is in his 1993 book, "Looking for a Miracle," in which Nickell argued for both the painting theory:

"In fact, there is no mention of this particular `shroud' for some thirteen centuries [a falsehood]; then a respected bishop reportedly uncovered an artist who confessed to having created it. In a letter of 1389 to Pope Clement VII, Bishop Pierre d'Arcis reported on an earlier investigation ... D'Arcis continued, speaking of the earlier bishop who conducted the investigation: Eventually, after diligent inquiry and examination, he discovered the fraud and how the said cloth had been cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed" (Nickell, J., 1993, "Looking for a Miracle," pp.25-26).
and the bas relief/statue theory:
"As an alternative to the painting hypothesis, some two years before McCrone published his findings, I reported the results of my own successful experiments in creating shroudlike `negative' images. The technique involved wet-molding cloth to a bas-relief (used instead of a fully three-dimensional statue to minimize distortion), allowing it to dry, then rubbing on powdered pigment using a dauber-much as one would make a rubbing from a gravestone. This technique automatically yields 'negative' images (or rather, just like the shroud, quasi-negative images, since the hair and beard are the opposite of what would be expected). It also produces numerous other shroudlike features, including minimal depth of penetration into the threads, encoded `3-D' information, and other similarities, some of which specifically pointed to some form of imprinting technique." (Nickell, 1993, pp.27-28).
But they are mutually exclusive; the evidence for one is evidence against the other! ... Nickell, the skeptic, amasses multiple arguments to cast doubt on the veracity of the shroud: It's contrary to Jewish burial practices at the time of Jesus, he said, which involved multiple linen cloths of plain weave - rather than the medieval herringbone pattern of the Turin cloth The Shroud is not "contrary to Jewish burial practices at the time of Jesus. The New Testament is a historical source of first century Jewish burials and it states that Joseph of Arimathea:
"... bought a linen shroud, and taking him [Jesus' dead body] down, wrapped him in the linen shroud and laid him in a tomb that had been cut out of the rock." (Mk 15:46; Mt 27:59; Lk 23:53).
That is a single linen cloth, and there are no Jewish stipulations about what sort of weave a shroud was to be. And that there was a large single shroud [Gk. sindon] does not preclude that there were other smaller burial cloths, e.g. the "face cloth" [Gk.soudarion](Jn 20:7 i.e. the Sudarium of Oviedo - see below). A rare and expensive shroud, as the Shroud's herringbone twill weave would have been, is just what Joseph of Arimathea, "a rich man" (Mt 27:57), would have bought for Jesus. - plus a washed body and quantities of burial spices suspiciously absent from the "relic." Nickell here reveals his ignorance of Shroud pro-authenticity literature. The Gospels record that Jesus' burial was rushed, leaving not enough time for the normal washing of His corpse, due the impending sabbath (Lk 23:44-54). And traces of the ancient spices aloes and myrrh have been found on the Shroud. It lacks any provenance before the mid-14th century, at which time a bishop's investigation claimed it was part of a faith-healing scam. The bishop said it was the work of a confessed artist. This is doubly false. First, there is evidence for the Shroud's provenance going all the way back to the first century. Second, Bishop d'Arcis' 1389 Memorandum did not claim that the exhibition of the Shroud in c. 1355 was "part of a faith-healing scam." Nickell just made that up, which shows how loose with the truth he can be, at least in Shroud matters. And as for, Bishop d'Arcis' mere hearsay claim that the Shroud `was the work of a confessed artist' it is significant that d'Arcis did not name the artist, indicating that d'Arcis was at best misinformed and at worst lying. Moreover, as STURP found in 1978, the Shroud is not a painting. There is no paint, pigment or dye on it which forms its image. That Nickell tacitly accepts this is evident in his above proposed "alternative" of his "bas-relief" theory. But if the d'Arcis painted forgery claim was true, there would be no need for an "alternative". Moreover, by Nickell's listing of the advantages of his bas-relief alternative (which has its own fatal problems), such as "quasi-negative images," "minimal depth of penetration," and "`3-D' information," Nickell tacitly admits that a painting does not have those features. If he were honest in this, Nickell would repudiate Bishop d'Arcis' false claim that the Shroud was a painted forgery. That he doesn't shows that Nickell is not interested in truth in this matter, but only in anti-Shroud/anti-Christian, propaganda, with which to mislead his gullible sceptic readers. It exhibits numerous flaws, such as the hair falling straight down, as would be the case for a standing, not a reclining, body; the hands placed discreetly over the loins (again contrary to Jewish practice), There are no flaws. If Jesus' body was laid in a shallow, head-and-body-shaped trough, as discovered in some 1st century Jewish cave tombs, then His hair would be supported by the edge of the trough and so appear to be hanging straight down. And as Ian Wilson documented in 1986:
"In Judea, a number of skeletons excavated in the Essene cemetery at Qumran (ca. 200 B.C. to A.D. 70) were laid out flat, facing upward, elbows bent slightly, and hands crossed across the pelvis, more or less exactly the attitude visible on the Shroud." (Wilson, 1986, p.35).
the "blood" stains remaining suspiciously red and picture-like. The "blood" has failed a battery of tests by internationally known forensic serologists, and subsequent analysis claimed it was tempera paint containing red ocher and vermilion pigments - pigments that were also found throughout the image (but not off-image) areas. Again, all false. As the late eminent blood chemist Prof. Alan Adler (1932-2000) found in Shroud blood samples, their red colour is due to "an extraordinarily high bilirubin count," which in turn would be the case of a crucifixion victim:
"There is an extraordinarily high bilirubin count, almost as high as the methemoglobin. Now how does one account for such a high bilirubin in a person? One possibility is that the person had a severe malaria, but this does not seem very likely. But a torture, scourging and crucifixion leading to shock - that would produce a tremendous hemolysis. In less than 30 seconds, the hemolyzed hemoglobin will run through the liver, building up a very high bilirubin content in the blood. If that blood then clots, the exudate forms, and all the intact cells with hemoglobin stay behind, only the hemolyzed hemoglobin goes out along with the serum albumin which binds the bilirubin. So what one ends up with on the cloth is an exudate which has an enhanced bilirubin index with respect to the hemolyzed hemoglobin. You now mix bilirubin which is yellow-orange with methemoglobin in its para-hemic form which is an orangey-brown and you get blood which has a red color." (Adler, A.D., 1986, "The Origin and Nature of Blood on the Turin Shroud").
And after listing a battery of 13 tests conducted by him and the late Professor of Medicine, John H. Heller (1921-1995), Adler stated:
"That means that the red stuff on the Shroud is emphatically, and without any reservation, nothing else but B-L-O-O-D!" (Heller, 1983, p.216. Emphasis original).
Proponents lack any viable hypothesis for the image formation, and have dismissed re-creations that others have found convincing. Jackson's Cloth Collapse image formation theory explains all the major features of the Shroud. And there have been no recreations of the whole Shroud by sceptics. All there has been is various attempts by sceptics to recreate the Shroud face, and they all have been unconvincing. A pro- authenticist, David Rolfe, commissioned an artist to recreate the whole Shroud for his film documentary, "Silent Witness," but that was also unconvincing. In fact the artist, who was not a pro-authenticist before attempting his recreation of the Shroud, became one after it:
"When in the late 1970s the British artist John Weston was given the task of copying the Shroud tone by tone for the TV documentary The Silent Witness he found himself so deeply impressed that he became convinced of the Shroud's genuineness." (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.121).
The cloth was radiocarbon dated by three laboratories (Oxford University, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, under the auspices of the Pontifical Academy for Sciences) to circa 1260–1390. Proponents nevertheless claim the sample taken for dating came from a "medieval patch," but this is contradicted by the textile experts who took the samples. For once I agree with Nickell! As I have stated, "Conventional explanations of the discrepancy don't work" (see also part #10(2)) as viable complete explanations of why the 1st century Shroud has a 13th/14th century radiocarbon date. But this is evidence for my theory that the radiocarbon dating laboratories were duped by a computer hacker! ...

"Rex Morgan's `Shroud News' Coming to!," Spring Update - May 6, 2015, From September 1980 until December 2001, Australian education pioneer, writer and broadcaster Rex Morgan published 118 issues of Shroud News,

[Right: "Rex Morgan's 'Shroud News' Issue No. 1 - 24 September 1980"]

a publication initially intended to spread the word of the Shroud in Australia, but which included many important papers and articles and ultimately reached worldwide distribution, making Rex one of the best known names in the Shroud world. In fact, Father Peter Rinaldi referred to Rex as "Australia's Number One apostle of the Shroud." Rex toured an extensive Shroud photographic exhibition throughout Australia and New Zealand and to Hong Kong and Macau in the 1980's. He also conducted his own research and became a familiar face and an important voice at every major Shroud conference around the world. So we are very proud to announce that, thanks to Rex's gracious permission, starting in our summer update later this year we will begin publishing Shroud News here on Once again, this is only possible thanks to the tireless efforts of Stephen E. Jones ... This was mentioned as coming in April's SoTN. I am enjoying reading Shroud News and am learning things about the Shroud I didn't know. Morgan, a non-Catholic Australian (like myself), travelled the world, attending Shroud events and meeting leading Shroud personalities. He actually saw the Shroud at its 1978 exposition, as recounted in his first book:

"As we entered around the great columns I saw, as did the others, exposed publicly for the first time in forty-six years, suspended in front of the high altar, the most priceless relic in Christendom, the Holy Shroud of Christ. Some of the gathering immediately knelt and crossed themselves, suddenly subdued and deeply moved by what they saw. Many others, hardened pressmen, thought only of their assignment and hastily began setting up their elaborate equipment. As if the Shroud were about to disappear from their eyes they began a cacophony of light and sound as cameras started to whir, flash bulbs to pop and floodlights to bathe the serenity of the cathedral with unaccustomed light. The Holy Shroud itself was hanging horizontally in a great frame of wood, covered with non-reflecting glass. It appeared to me at first to be lighted from behind, as it did to other witnesses, but I later discovered that it was in fact floodlit from the front. But it is interesting that its ethereal quality, a matter which has been remarked upon many times by observers over the ages, was such that my first impression was that it was backlighted." (Morgan, R., 1980, "Perpetual Miracle: Secrets of the Holy Shroud of Turin by an Eye Witness," p.22).

"Stains on the Sudarium of Oviedo coincide with those on the Shroud", Vatican Insider, May 2, 2015, Andrea Tornielli ... "All the information[Above: "The Sudarium of Oviedo."] obtained from the studies and research" carried out on the Shroud of Turin and the Sudarium of Oviedo" is in tune with what one would expect - from a forensic medicine point of view - to happen to cloths with these characteristics were they to cover the head of a body featuring the kind of lesions Jesus of Nazareth suffered, just as the Gospels tell us." Alfonso Sánchez Hermosilla, Doctor in Forensic Medicine, stated this at a conference held by the International Centre of Syndonology [sic] in Turin today. ... Hermosilla is the forensic expert who took over the study of the Oviedo Sudarium from Mgr. Giulio Ricci, who began examining it in the 1960s. "The similarity in the morphology and dimension of the stains" between the Sudarium of Oviedo and "the Turin Shroud", led Ricci to believe "that he had actually found the relic St. John speaks of" in his Gospel, when he mentions the sudarium in the tomb. [John 20:7. "and the face cloth [Greek soudarion], which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself."] From a forensic anthropological point of view and a forensic medicine point of view," Hermosilla continued, "all the information that emerged from the scientific investigation is compatible with the theory that the Turin Shroud and the Sudarium covered the corpse of the same person." The Sudarium of Oviedo is a relic that is kept in "El Salvador" Cathedral in Oviedo, Spain, in the Holy Chamber used as the building’s chapel during the reign of King Alphonse II [Alfonso II of Asturias(†759–842)] ... "This cloth was present in the region of northern Spain from the year 812 or 842" and "is made of linen; it measures approximately 84 x 54 centimetres." The "composition" of the textile structure of the Shroud and the Sudarium "is the same - substantially linen – the thickness of the fibres is identical ..." The Sudarium has nothing of the mysterious image present on the Shroud which was produced after the body that had been wrapped in it stained the sheet with blood and other fluids. All that there is, are traces of blood and other bodily fluids "from a human corpse" ... "The morphological study of stains in both linens reveal an obvious similarity between them ... both group of stains match very well ... not only in their relative position but also in their superficial size." In addition, there is a "correspondence on the distances between the staining injuries which originated the stains" ... the Sudarium of Oviedo "covered the face of the corpse" before it was wrapped in the Turin Shroud. "There are a high number of matches between the injuries which can be appreciated in the image of the Shroud of Turin, and ... the Sudarium of Oviedo." ... One of the pieces of evidence which the Spanish doctor considers most important, are the blood stains attributable to the crown of thorns. "The blood stains attributed to the thorns of the crown can be appreciated in both relics with a high similarity in the distance which separates them." "The surface of the nose in both linens is very similar; in the Sudarium of Oviedo it has an area of 2.280 mm2, and in the Shroud of Turin 2.0002. Moreover, by the middle of the right area of the nose there is a zone which is inflamed which measures 1002 in the Sudarium of Oviedo and 902 in the Shroud of Turin." ... The large number of close similarities between the bloodstains on the Sudarium and the Shroud is a `two factor authentication' which proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the Shroud and the Sudarium are authentic. The Sudarium is known to have entered Spain in the 7th century, so the already superhuman medieval forger would have had to forge both the Shroud and Sudarium no later than the 7th century! And there is no reason why such an unimpressive, bloodstained rag as the Sudarium of Oviedo is, was kept in the first place unless it was known by Jesus' original disciples to have covered His once dead face and head.

"'Angelic' Face of Young Jesus Reconstructed from Shroud of Turin," The Christian Times, Monica Cantilero, 30 April, 2015. The face of a "12-year-old" Jesus is seen here after its "re-creation" by the scientific unit of Rome's police force which used the Shroud of Turin (upper images at right) to reverse the age of the man whose facial image is imprinted in the Shroud. ... The image of the young Jesus was computer-generated by the Italian police who reversed the technology they used for adding wrinkles to the drawings of Mafia bosses to identify them after decades on the run ... To create the image of the young Jesus, the police subtracted years from the man's face imprinted on the Shroud of Turin and removed his beard. They also colored his hair blonde and lightened his complexion. "The angelic face is reminiscent of the prayer cards sold in Vatican souvenir shops ... Paul Damon, a geoscientist who was part of the team that held a carbon-14 dating test on the Shroud in 1998, reacted negatively to the police recreation of Jesus' face, saying it's a "malarkey," adding: "The boy would not be blond." ... The scientific unit of Rome's police force was prompted to create the image upon the suggestion of television news reporters who were doing a special news program about Jesus. ... I agree with the late Prof. Paul E. Damon (1921–2005), that Jesus, being a first-century Jew, would not have been blond. So this reconstruction of Jesus' face loses whatever credibility it would have had on that fact alone. The story is actually old news, being based on a 2004 article in the The New York Times in which it was pointed out that "when the police added receding hairlines or wrinkles to mobsters, they had family photographs to work from. They had no such genetic information handy about the parents of Jesus."

"If the Turin Shroud is the work of a medieval artist, it's one of the greatest artworks ever created," The Spectator, Dominic Selwood, 27 April 2015 ... Our first definite knowledge of the shroud is an event in [Above: "The Shroud of Turin: modern photo of the face, left; digitally processed image right"] around AD 1355, when it was put on show in the tiny French village of Lirey, in Champagne. Its owners were the local knight, Geoffrey de Charney, and his wife, Jeanne de Vergy ... there is no known connection between this Geoffrey de Charney (or his son of the same name) and the famous Knight Templar called Geoffrey de Charney, who was preceptor of Normandy and was burned alongside Grand Master Jacques de Molay as a relapsed heretic in 1314, three quarters of a century earlier. According to a number of family trees, including my de Charny family tree, Geoffroy de Charny (1240-1314), the Templar, was the brother of Dreux I de Charny et de Mont-Saint-Jean (1235-85), who was the father of Jean I de Charny et de Mont-Saint-Jean (1263-1323), who was the father of Geoffroy I de Charny (c. 1300–1356), the first undisputed owner of the Shroud. That makes the Templar Geoffroy de Charny the great-uncle of Geoffroy I de Charny. And since there are no other Geoffroys in the de Charny and de Mont-Saint-Jean family trees, it is likely that Geoffroy I de Charny was named after Geoffroy de Charny the Templar. At the time of the 1355 exhibition, Henry de Poitiers, bishop of Troyes, conducted an inquiry into the cloth, concluding that it was a `fraud' which had been `cunningly painted, the truth being attested by the artist who had painted it, to wit, that it was a work of human skill and not miraculously wrought or bestowed'. There is no evidence for, and much evidence against, this mere hearsay claim of Bishop Pierre d'Arcis (1300-95): 1) the Shroud is not painted; 2) Bishop Henri de Poitiers (1327-70) wrote approvingly of Geoffroy I's exhibition of the Shroud in c.1355; 3) Geoffroy I's son, Geoffroy II, married Bishop Henri's niece, Marguerite de Poitiers (c. 1362-1418); and 4) Geoffroy II and Marguerite de Poitiers daughter, Marguerite de Charny (1390-1460), bequeathed her Lirey lands and title to Antoine Guerry des Essarts (1408–74), the son of Bishop Henri's illegitimate daughter, Guillemette de Poitiers (c. 1370-c. 1450), which can only mean that the de Charny and de Poitiers families had a close and friendly relationship, which would be impossible if Bishop Henri de Poitiers had denounced the Shroud as a fraud. ... the shroud was finally carbon dated in 1988 ... Laboratories in Oxford, Tucson, and Zurich ... all concurred ... in a date range of AD 1260–1390. ... There is much evidence that the laboratories were duped by a computer hacker, allegedly Arizona laboratory physicist, Timothy W. Linick. ... The Turin Shroud ... If it truly is the work of a medieval artist ... then it is a genuine wonder that brings us into the presence of the genius of the medieval world ... This is the dilemma that the late John E. Walsh (1927-2015) pointed out:

"Only this much is certain: The Shroud of Turin is either the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence-showing us in its dark simplicity how He appeared to men-or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground." (Walsh, J.E., 1963, "The Shroud," pp.xi-xii. My emphasis).
If those who claim that the Shroud is the work of a medieval artist were consistent, they would press for it to be included among "the greatest artworks ever created." That they don't shows that they don't really believe what they say, and they only say it to dismiss the Shroud as authentic, so that, like the proverbial ostrich with its head in the sand, they don't have to consider that Christianity is true (which it is!).

Created: 9 May 2015. Updated: 14 May 2015