Tuesday, June 5, 2018

Obituary (4): Dr. Alan Duane Whanger (17 July 1930 - 21 October 2017)

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the fifteenth and final installment of part #4 of my obituary of Dr. Alan D. Whanger (1930-2017). Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. Previous parts in this series are part #1, part #2 and part #3. See also "Flowers and Pollens - Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin", my 2013 "The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks (4): Plant images" and my 2014 "Lynne Milne's `A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice' (2005)".

In 1985 Whanger noticed a flower on a Shroud photograph As previously mentioned in part #3 [see also 06Apr13], in 1985 Dr Alan

[Above (enlarge): A corona discharge image of a Chrysanthemum produced by Oswald Scheuermann (left), the image of a Palestinian Chrysanthemum coronarium flower on the Shroud (center) and a drawing of that flower on the Shroud (right)[2].]

Whanger noticed on a high-quality Shroud photograph given to them by Fr. Francis L. Filas (1915-85)[3] the image of a flower near the head of the man on the Shroud[4].

In 1983 Oswald Scheuermann wrote to Whanger about flower images near the face on the Shroud In 1983, Oswald Scheuermann [Right [5].], a German physics teacher with whom Whanger had been corresponding regarding coins over the eyes [see part #3], had mentioned in a letter to Whanger that there were flower-like patterns around the face of the man of the Shroud, but Whanger could not then seen them[6].

That first flower Whanger saw on the Shroud was a Chrysanthemum coronarium That first flower image Whanger saw on a Shroud photograph (hereafter simply "the Shroud") was (as he later identified-see below) Chrysanthemum coronarium (see above and below)[7]. Ian Wilson who is sceptical (as I am) of Whanger's

[Above (enlarge): A Chrysanthemum coronarium flower image near the head of the man on the Shroud, pointed to with my red arrow. This is on Shroud Scope[8], so readers can verify it for themselves. This is the clearest flower image on the Shroud[9] and is readily discernible with the unaided eye[10]. Chrysanthemum coronarium is a widespread Mediterranean species that grows in Israel and Jordan[11]. Also as can be seen above there are a lot of other flowers visible around the head of the man on the Shroud (see below).]

"Points of Congruence" claims [e.g. see 02Jan18] nevertheless had to admit this "flower-like shape" really was there "in the relevant sector of the Shroud":

"One `flower' ... which even I can acknowledge a flower-like shape in the relevant sector of the Shroud ... was the very first one that Alan Whanger had identified on the Shroud, the crown chrysanthemum or Chrysanthemum coronarium"[12]!
The Whangers began to see many other flower and plant images on the Shroud Once having seen this one flower image, Alan and Mary Whanger began to see a great many other flower and plant images (see below) on the Shroud[13].

[Above (enlarge): Drawings of the location of flower and plant images around the face of the man on the Shroud by Prof. Avinoam Danin (1939–2015)[14].]

In 1986 Whanger began identifying those other flower and plant images In 1986 Alan Whanger obtained a set of Michael Zohary's six-volume Flora Palaestina and began comparing its ~1900 drawings with flower and plant images he could see on the Shroud[15]. Starting with the drawings Max Frei (1913-83) had made of some of the 58 species of plants the pollen of which he had found on the Shroud[16], by 1989 the Whangers had tentatively identified from their flowers and parts 28 species of plants on the Shroud[17], including Chrysanthemum coronarium[18]:

"While there are images of hundreds of flowers on the Shroud, many are vague or incomplete. We feel Alan has identified, tentatively but with reasonable certainty, twenty-eight plants whose images are sufficiently clear and complete to make a good comparison with the drawings in Flora Palaestina. Of these twenty-eight plants, twenty-three are flowers, three are small bushes, and two are thorns. All twenty-eight grow in Israel. Twenty grow in Jerusalem itself, and the other eight grow potentially within the close vicinity of Jerusalem, either in the Judean Desert or in the Dead Sea area or in both. All twenty-eight would have been available in Jerusalem markets in a fresh state. Many would have been growing along the roadside or in nearby fields, available for the picking. A rather unique situation exists in that within Jerusalem and the surrounding twelve miles, four geographic areas exist with their differing specific climates and flora. Nowhere else are so many different types of species found so close together. Of these twenty-eight plants, Frei, working from the sticky tape slides, had previously identified the pollens of twenty-five of the same or similar plants. Twenty-seven of these twenty-eight bloom in March and April, which corresponds to the time of Passover and the Crucifixion"[19]!
In 1995 Prof. Danin saw "the flowers of Jerusalem" on the Shroud! In 1995 the Whangers visited one of Israel's leading botanists, Prof. Avinoam Danin (1939–2015) [Left (enlarge) [20].], at his home in Jerusalem[21]. They showed Danin some of their photographs of the flower images on the Shroud and within seconds of looking at them Danin exclaimed, "Those are the flowers of Jerusalem"[22]!

In 1997 Danin visited the Whangers' and agreed with most of their identifications In 1997 Danin visited the Whangers' home in Durham, North Carolina[23] and after a study of their photographs, agreed with most (22/28 = ~79%) of their Shroud plant species identifications:

"In 1997 during a visit to our home, Danin made a careful and detailed examination of our photographs and of the images on the Shroud. He stated that he agrees with confidence with twenty-two of the twenty-eight plant identifications that we had made. Of the remaining six identifications, he said that three are probably correct and the other three are possibly correct, but he could not identify them with certainty because the images are too fragmentary. In no case did he totally disagree with our original tentative identification or fail to see some imaging. Moreover, he discovered a large number of additional flower images that we had not found"[24].
By 1999 Danin had identified at least 13 species of plants on the Shroud In his 1999 "Flora of the Shroud of Turin" Danin lists 16 categories of plant-related images he found on the Shroud[25]. Below is my simplified table of 13 of them that are flowers or plants, based on Danin's Table 4[26]. Of these species Danin listed many

Images found on the Shroud of Turin
determined by A. Danin
No.FamilySpecies
1AsteraceaeChrysanthemum coronarium
2CistaceaeCistus creticus
3DipsacaceaeLomelosia (Scabiosa) prolifera
4FabaceaeHippocrepis unisiliquosa
5AnacardiaceaePistacia lentiscus
6AnacardiaceaePistacia atlantica or P. Palaestina
7ApiaceaeRidolfia segetum
8AsteraceaeGundelia tournefortii
9CapparaceaeCapparis aegyptia
10ZygophyllaceaeZygophyllum dumosum
11RhamnaceaeZiziphus spina-christi
12RanunculaceaeAnemone coronaria
13PoaceaeArundo donax

instances against some (e.g. No. 6 "Dozens"). Danin actually found "hundreds" of flower and plant images on the Shroud but he was primarily interested in those that were geographic indicators[27], i.e. found only in Israel and Jordan and especially around Jerusalem (see below).

Danin's geographic indicators Prof. Danin had already plotted in squares (quadrats) of 5 x 5 kilometres each the locations of many thousands of plant species in Israel[28]. During his 1997 visit to the Whangers' home (see above), Danin saw on their Shroud photo-graphs images of leaves of the Zygophyllum dumosum [Right (enlarge)[29].] shrub near flower images of that same species which the Whangers had correctly identified[30]. Danin realised that Z. dumosum on the

[Above (enlarge): Distribution map of the endemic species Zygophyllum dumosum which is confined to Israel, Sinai and Western Jordan[31].]

Shroud was a very important geographical indicator, because fresh leaves of that plant could only be brought to the Shroud from Israel, West Jordan, or Sinai[32].

Similarly, the thorn Gundelia tournefortii, the image of which was also found on the Shroud (see above table) has a distribution which is Middle Eastern, extending from western Turkey through Israel, Syria and northern Iraq, Iran and the southernmost fringes of the former Soviet Union[33]. The rock rose, Cistus creticus, the image of which is also on the Shroud (see table above) grows across the Mediterranean zone in western Israel with a desert boundary to the east of Jerusalem[34]. The only place on earth where people could bring

[Above (enlarge): Distribution map of the only place on earth where Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus are all found growing together[35], the area around Jerusalem ("J" in green circle)[36].

fresh parts of the three species Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus, is the area between Jerusalem and Hebron[37], a distance of a mere 20 miles (32 kilometres)[38]!

Danin's temporal indicators As well as being geographic indicators, some of the flower image species identified by Danin are also temporal (i.e. time of year and even time of day) indicators[39]. Below is my simplified table of the blooming months of the 8 plant species in Danin's Table 6[40].

Blooming time of Middle Eastern
species associated with the Shroud
SpeciesDecJanFebMarAprMayJun
Anemone coronaria+++++  
Capparis aegyptia+++++  
Chrys. coronarium   +++ 
Cistus creticus   ++++
Gundelia tournefortii   +++ 
Lomelosia prolifera   ++  
Ridolfia segetum   ++++
Zygophyllum dumosum+++++  

As can be seen in the above table, Zygophyllum dumosum in the stage of bloom seen on the Shroud indicates that it was cut between the months of December and April as this is the only season when both leaf types and flowers are found together on the plant[41]. The blooming time of Chrysanthemum coronarium is from March to May; that of Capparis aegyptia is between December and April; as is Zygophyllum dumosum's (as already mentioned); Cistus creticus blooms from March to June, and Gundelia tournefortii from March to May[42]. All these flowering period have in common the period between March and May, which was the very period of the year within which Jesus' Passover eve crucifixion (Mt 26:2; Jn 18:28,39; 19:14) occurred[43] (which was on 7 April 30, or 3 April 33)[44]. Capparis aegyptia is significant as an indicator for the time of day when its flowers were picked, since its flowering buds begin to open at about midday and gradually open until they are fully opened about half an hour before sunset[45]. Flowers seen as images on the Shroud correspond to them having been picked at about 3-4 pm[46], which corresponds to the time of the death of Jesus, "the ninth hour" (Mt 27:45-50; Mk 15:33-39; Lk 23:44-46), i.e. 3 pm[47].

Confirmation of Max Frei's pollen species Of the 28 species of plant images the Whangers' identified on the Shroud (see above), these were the same or similar to 25 species of pollen collected from the Shroud and identified by the pioneer Swiss forensic scientist, Max Frei (1913-83)[48]. Some of the plant images on the Shroud confirms the identification by Frei of certain Palestinian and Middle Eastern species

[Left (enlarge): Max Frei with STURP's Ray Rogers (1927–2005) looking on, using adhesive tape to take pollen samples from the Shroud in 1978[49].]

of pollen on the Shroud[50]. For example, Gundelia tournefortii was one of the more abundant pollen species that Frei identified on the Shroud and Danin and Baruch have confirmed that identification[51]. And significantly, one of Danin's Cistus creticus images occurs in the very same spot that Frei in 1973 found pollen which he identified as Cistus creticus on the Shroud[52]! Which is not to say that Frei's identification of pollens was perfect, but Whanger and Danin's flower and plant images identifications confirmed that Frei was mostly right:

"Carefully examining one of the Frei slides, researcher Paul Maloney discovered a cluster of many pollens from the same plant. These pollens were identified by palynologist Dr. A. Orville Dahl as Cistus creticus. ... Years earlier, Frei had identified pollens from this same plant on his sticky tape slides. At the time he took the sticky tape samples, he was unaware of the images of flowers on the Shroud, but it so happened that the tape Maloney was observing had been taken over the center of the same Cistus creticus flower that Alan had already identified. Thus Frei, Maloney with Dahl, and Alan, all working separately and at different times and using different methods, found the presence of Cistus creticus on the Shroud. Since Alan used Frei's pollen identification list to search for flowers bearing those pollens, most of the flowers that we identified do have pollens that were present on the Shroud. However, Alan did note some possible discrepancies between his identification by means of the images on the Shroud and Frei's identification by means of pollens. For instance, Frei identified a pollen as an Althea, but the closest match to the flower image that Alan could find was a rather similar plant named Alcea"[53].
Problems for anti-authenticism: (1) Frei was right! See above. As mentioned in my 22Aug14 post, leading anti-authenticists Steven Schafersman (quoted approvingly by the late Walter McCrone), employed the fallacy of circular reasoning to dismiss the dead Max Frei as a fraudster[53]. Because: 1) the Shroud is not authentic (they claimed); 2) Frei's Middle Eastern distribution of Shroud pollen would be strong evidence that the Shroud is authentic; 3) therefore Frei's Shroud pollen distribution must be fraudulent and Frei must be a fraudster:
"In a similar fashion, I will show that Max Frei's pollen data can be most reasonably explained by human fraud because the only other possible explanations are that the Shroud of Turin is authentic, that a miracle occurred, or both. Since we are pretty certain as scientists that the Shroud is not authentic and that miracles don't occur, human deception is the only explanation remaining"[54].
Schafersman does not consider the other explanation, namely that the "human deception" (i.e. self-deception) is on the part of him and his Shroud sceptic ilk! In particular his/their unproven and unprovable fundamental article of faith that Naturalism (`nature is all there is-there is no supernatural') is true and therefore "miracles don't occur". Helpfully, Schafersman explained why anti-authenticists must attempt to discredit Frei's Shroud pollen findings and Frei personally:
"Max Frei, a well-known forensic microscopist, was allowed to take sticky-tape samples from the Shroud of Turin in 1973. He reported his results in 1978 at the International Congress on the Turin Shroud ... Frei claims to have found the pollen of 49 different plants, 33 of which are xerophyte, halophytes, or mesophytes found in Israel (Palestine), Turkey, or both, and not in Western Europe. The remaining 16 are present in Italy and France ... Frei's pollen data, if true, would be superb evidence of the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. The pollen data would demonstrate that, at the very least, the Shroud had been in Jerusalem, the Anatolian steppes, and Istanbul (many of the 33 Turkish and Palestinian plants are endemic to these three specific areas). Frei's data does not demonstrate, of course, that the Shroud is not an artifact: the blank cloth could have been transported and exposed through these regions before reaching France, or a Palestinian artist could have created the image before the journey began. However, these explanations are highly unlikely, and have no support in either history or iconography ... Frei's data is such excellent evidence because pollen almost invariably falls to the ground within 100 meters of the parent plant. This phenomenon is used in palynology and biostratigraphy ... because wind pollination is an inefficient process compared to insect pollination, and wind-transported pollen just doesn't travel very far. Therefore, finding such pollen on an object would indeed demonstrate that it was once in an area where such pollen was present ... Finally, the remarkably large number of Middle Eastern plant pollen, 33 species, appears to make it inescapable that the Shroud was once in the Middle East"[55].
But Frei was a Zwinglian Protestant[56] and therefore had no prior reason to believe that the Shroud was authentic (indeed the opposite):
"Frei, it seems, was initially sceptical of the Shroud's authenticity, as would be expected of a Zwinglian Protestant. What he saw under the microscope, though, changed his mind. As he analysed the plentiful pollen picked up by his sticky tapes, he began to realize that the Shroud could not have spent all its time in France and Italy. For, besides pollen grains from central European and Mediterranean lands, which could easily have blown onto the Shroud in the previous 600 years, he found large numbers of grains from much further afield. A significant proportion of these indicate, Frei says, that the Shroud was once kept in Turkey: 'According to the palynology, the Shroud must have been exposed to the open air also in. Turkey, since twenty of the verified species are abundant in Anatolia ... and four are abundant in the environs of Constantinople; these are completely absent from central and western Europe.' This is extremely interesting in relation to certain historical evidence, which suggests that, long before it was brought to Europe, the Shroud was kept in Constantinople and Edessa, a town in eastern Turkey. Furthermore, on the basis of finding pollen from thirteen species of halophytes - a genus specially adapted to living in salty environments, many of them exclusive to the Negev desert and Dead Sea area - Frei affirms that `in the course of its history (including its manufacture) the Shroud has been in Palestine'. Just as significant, in Frei's view, as the identification of individual species or genera is the overall proportion of Middle Eastern to European pollen grains: 'the Shroud must have stayed in Palestine or in Turkey, since plants that grow in these areas ... are dominant in the pollen spectrum'"[57].
Moreover, Frei's actions were not that of a fraudster. As I had previously [25Aug14] pointed out:
"The obvious test of Frei's integrity is that, unlike a fraudster, Frei patiently collected his data for 9 years, traveling to Palestine and Turkey several times to collect pollen to compare his Shroud pollen with, but he died before he completed his research. A fraudster would have pretended to identify his Shroud pollen quickly and published his findings early, so that he could soon gain fame and maybe fortune."
And [16May15 (footnotes added)]:
"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'[58].
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'"[59].

Problems for anti-authenticism: (2) A medieval forger would not not have depicted Middle Eastern flowers and plants on the Shroud Self-evidently a medieval forger would not have known about Middle Eastern flowers and plants, let alone depicted them with modern botanical accuracy and realism (even plant parts!). Nor would a medieval forger have known about the geographic distribution patterns of some of those plants around Jerusalem, nor their blooming seasons. Proof that Shroud sceptics have no good answer to this flower and plant evidence of Whanger and Danin is the misleading and even dishonest way that leading professional sceptic Joe Nickell dismisses it:

"Shroud of Rorschach. Following the suspicious pollen evidence were claims that plant images had been identified on the cloth. These were allegedly discerned from `smudgy' appearing areas in shroud photos that were subsequently enhanced. The work was done by a retired geriatric psychiatrist, Alan Whanger, and his wife Mary, former missionaries who have taken up image analysis as a hobby. They were later assisted by an Israeli botanist who looked at their photos of `flower' images (many of them `wilted' and otherwise distorted) and exclaimed, `Those are the flowers of Jerusalem!' Apparently no one has thought to see if some might match the flowers of France or Italy or even to try to prove that the images are indeed floral ..."[60].
Note that Nickell dishonestly conceals from his readers that the "Israeli botanist" was in fact Prof. Avinoam Danin (1939–2015), one of Israel's leading botanists and author of "Flora of Israel Online":
"Prof. Emeritus Avinoam Danin was a researcher and teacher in the Hebrew University of Jerusalem for more than 50 years. The information accumulated in the website, as well as many of the photographs within it, were his work. During his excursions in Israel and neighboring countries he discovered 43 species and 3 subspecies new to science. Three additional species are named after him. His detailed phytosociological work is published in hundreds of articles, 7 books in English and 7 in Hebrew. On December 12, 2015, Avinoam Danin passed away at age 76 ..."[61]
But if Nickell had included Danin's name his readers could have Googled it and discovered that Nickell was misleading them. Also, Nickell's, "Apparently no one has thought to see if some might match the flowers of France or Italy or even to try to prove that the images are indeed floral" is a lie because Nickell knew that Whanger had positively identified the flower images on the Shroud as Palestinian species using Flora Palaestina (see above) and that their identifications were mostly confirmed by Prof. Danin. Indeed Nickell even quoted Danin's words, "Those are the flowers of Jerusalem!" when he saw Whanger's Shroud photographs (see above)! Nickell is thus included in the fulfillment of St. Paul's prophecy in 2 Timothy 3:13: "... impostors ... deceiving and being deceived"!

More evidence for Jesus' resurrection! For their images to be imprinted on the Shroud, the flowers and parts of plants discovered by Scheuermann, Whanger and Danin had to have been laid on the man's body under the Shroud:

"Some have wondered if perhaps the flowers may have been placed on the Shroud during its exhibitions for the public, and maybe that's where flower images and pollen came from. Indeed, flowers likely would have been placed there during showings or liturgical use. If so, certainly some of the pollen did come from those flowers. On his sticky tape samples from the Shroud, Frei found pollens which are characteristic of the areas around Edessa and Constantinople, places where the Shroud was located for hundreds of years. But ... it is not possible that large numbers of plants from Israel and other Middle East areas were brought to France and Italy in a fresh state for exhibitions there. Nor does it account for the presence of the corona discharge type images on the Shroud. It seems clear that flowers were indeed in the Shroud around the body, and that their images were imprinted on the cloth at the same time and in the same manner as the other images"[62].
While neither Whanger nor Danin (a Jew) did, as far as I am aware, claim specifically that these flower and plant images on the Shroud were produced by (and therefore evidence of) Jesus' resurrection, Scheuermann did. As previously mentioned in part #3, in proposing corona discharge to be the explanation of the Shroud's total body image (which included the flower and plant images), Scheuermann posited that the Shroud man was Jesus and the image on the Shroud was caused by His resurrection:
"Either there was a chain of coordinated processes of cause and effect due to laws that are still unknown or an inexplicable phenomenon of a supernatural kind left traces of a natural kind ... Consequently, it is high time now to completely record the primary aspect and add the phenomenon `resurrection' to the fact `corpse.' ... `Resurrection,' even if inexplicable, must not be excluded as a point of reference or an action principle ... It has to be admitted that we know hardly anything as to how that resurrection is to have taken place; but that does not exclude that it could have left palpable traces ... not only an empty tomb and all the attendant circumstances, but also a very informative image"[64].

To be continued in the next part #5 of my obituary of Dr. Alan D. Whanger.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided it includes a reference citing my name, its subject heading, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Danin, A., 1997, "Pressed Flowers: Where Did the Shroud of Turin Originate?: A Botanical Quest," ERETZ Magazine, November/December. [return]
3. Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, p.71; Whanger, A.D. & Whanger, M.W., 2008, "Aspects of the Shroud in Botany and Related Art," in 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, pp.140-144, 140. [return]
4. Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, pp.25,28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, pp.7,9; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.7; Maloney, P.C., 1999, "A Contribution toward a History of Botanical Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Walsh, B.J., ed., 2000, "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, pp.241-266, 251; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.112; Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, pp.82-83; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.149; Milne, L., 2005, "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice," New Holland: Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia, pp.94. [return]
5. "Oswald Scheuermann," Nuernberg Wiki, 9 November 2017. Translated by Google. [return]
6. Iannone, 1998, p.25; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.7; Maloney, 1999, p.251; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Milne, 2005, p.93; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141. [return]
7. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.85-86; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, p.258. [return]
8. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
9. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.16. [return]
10. Maloney, 1999, p.251. [return]
40. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.16. [return]
12. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.85-86. [return]
13. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.71, 76; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141. [return]
14. Danin, A., 2010, "`Holes' in the 3D-Image of the Body on the Shroud," Petrus Soons. Photo no longer online. [return]
15. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.75-76; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141; Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel, p.8. [return]
16. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.77; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141. [return]
17. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Milne, 2005, p.94; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141; Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
18. Iannone, 1998, p.27. [return]
19. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78 (footnotes omitted). [return]
20. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.85. [return]
21. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.79. [return]
22. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.79; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.85; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.142. [return]
23. Danin, 2010, p.12. [return]
24. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80. [return]
25. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.17. [return]
26. Ibid. [return]
27. Danin, 2010, p.46. [return]
28. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80. [return]
29. Danin, A., 2013, "Zygophyllum dumosum Boiss," Flora of Israel Online. [return]
30. Danin, 2010, p.12. [return]
31. Danin, A. & Baruch, U., 1998, "Floristic Indicators for the Origin of the Shroud of Turin," Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 5-7 June 1998, Turin, Italy, in Minor, M., Adler, A.D. & Piczek, I., eds., 2002, "The Shroud of Turin: Unraveling the Mystery: Proceedings of the 1998 Dallas Symposium," Alexander Books: Alexander NC, pp.202-214; Milne, 2005, p.94; Danin, 2010, p.17; Oxley, 2010, p.259. [return]
32. Danin, 2010, p.12. [return]
33. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.88. [return]
34. Danin, 2010, p.17. [return]
35. Danin, 2010, p.52. [return]
36. Danin, et al., 1999, pp.21-22. [return]
37. Danin, A., 1999, "Botanical Evidence Indicates `Shroud Of Turin' Originated In Jerusalem Area Before 8th Century," XVI International Botanical Congress, St. Louis, MO, Science Daily, August 3; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Danin, 2010, p.54; Oxley, 2010, p.259. [return]
38. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.92. [return]
39. Danin, et al., 1999, p.18. [return]
40. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
41. Danin, et al., 1999, p.18. [return]
42. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
43. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.91; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.142. [return]
44. Doig, K.F., 2006, "Doig's Biblical Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus." [return]
45. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22; Antonacci, 2000, p.113; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.142. [return]
46. Ibid. [return]
47. Mark 15:33-34, in Cole, R.A., 1989, "The Gospel According to Mark: An Introduction and Commentary," The Tyndale New Testament commentaries, Inter-Varsity Press Leicester: UK, Second edition, p.320. [return]
48. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.142. [return]
49. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.80-81. [return]
50. Tribbe, F.C., 2006, "Portrait of Jesus: The Illustrated Story of the Shroud of Turin," Paragon House Publishers: St. Paul MN, Second edition, p.278. [return]
51. Danin & Baruch, 1998, p.209; Milne, 2005, p.94; Oxley, 2010, p.258. [return]
52. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.86. [return]
53. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.79. [return]
54. Schafersman, S., in McCrone, W.C., "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Amherst NY, 1999, p.302. [return]
55. Schafersman, 1999, pp.303-304. [return]
56. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, pp.80; Wilson, I., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, p.43; Ruffin, C.B., 1999, "The Shroud of Turin: The Most Up-To-Date Analysis of All the Facts Regarding the Church's Controversial Relic," Our Sunday Visitor: Huntington IN, pp.75-76; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.113. [return]
57. de Wesselow, 2012, pp.113-114 (endnotes omitted). [return]
58. Frei, M., 1982, "Nine Years of Palinological Studies on the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 3, June, pp.2-7, 7. [return]
59. Ibid. [return]
60. Nickell, J., 2001, "Scandals and Follies of the 'Holy Shroud'," Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 25, No. 5, September, pp.17-20. [return]
61. "Avinoam Danin," Flora of Israel Online, 2015. [return]
62. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.82-83. [return]
63. Green, J.P., Sr., ed., 1986, "The Interlinear Bible: One Volume Edition," [1976], Hendrickson Publishers: Peabody MA, Second edition, p.839. [return]
64. Scheuermann, O., 1986, in Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.41. [return]

Posted: 5 June 2018. Updated: 19 June 2018.

No comments: