Monday, December 30, 2019

My position on the Shroud: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #7

My position on the Shroud: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #7

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!
MY POSITION ON THE SHROUD
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is "My position on the Shroud," part #7, of my online book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" For more information see the Cover, part #1 and Contents #2 of this series.

[Contents #2] [Previous: My Shroud blog #6] [Next: What is the Shroud of Turin? #8]


  1. Preface #3
    1. My position on the Shroud #7

My position on the Shroud is summarised in my blog's `masthead':

"I am persuaded by the evidence that the Shroud of Turin is the burial sheet of Jesus Christ and bears His crucified and resurrected image!"

[Above (enlarge)[2]: Close up of the `reversed 3' bloodstain on the left forehead of the man on the Shroud, and showing the crown of thorns puncture wound from which the blood originated. As can be seen, most of this large blood clot on the Shroudman's forehead is intact, while its upper and lower extremities have partially flaked off over foldlines. In fact all of the bloodstains on the Shroud are comprised of intact[3], unbroken[4], unsmeared[5], blood clots[6]. Since this clot, like all of them, would have adhered to both the man's skin and to the cloth, if the Shroud had been removed by human agency, the clot would be ragged along its entire length as when a bandage is removed from a once-bloody wound[7]. But Jesus' resurrected body could pass through solid walls (John 20:19,26)[8], so it could have passed through the no less solid Shroud cloth and dried blood clots, leaving them intact and adhering only to the cloth:

"If Vignon and Barbet are correct ... then the Corpse must have been freed from the Cloth in some quite unusual fashion. For the transfers of the dried blood are intact on the Shroud. Yet when a cloth is detached from a pattern of caked blood, a piece of the blood pattern clings as a rule to the skin. The Resurrection of Christ in His glorified Body would instantly explain this phenomenon ..."[9].
See "Blood clots intact #24" of this series.]


Continued in part #8 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002: Face Only Vertical," Sindonology.org. [return]
3. Wuenschel, E.A., 1954, "Self-Portrait of Christ: The Holy Shroud of Turin," Holy Shroud Guild: Esopus NY, Third printing, 1961, pp.51-52; Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI, pp.74,144; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, pp.156, 218; Morgan, R., 1982, "Shroud Symposium, New London," Shroud News, No 11, February 1982, pp.3-10, 6; Habermas, G.R., 1984a, "Ancient Evidence for the Life of Jesus," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, p.159; Habermas, G.R., 1984b, "Turin, Shroud of ," in Elwell, W.A., ed., "Evangelical Dictionary of Theology," Baker Book House: Grand Rapids MI., 1990, Seventh printing, p.1116; De Vincenzo, V., 1994, "12 Reasons Why I Cannot Accept the Carbon-14 Test Results on the Holy Shroud of Turin," Shroud News No 82, April, pp.3-13, 8; Barbet, P., 1987, "Proof of the Authenticity of the Shroud in the Bloodstains: Part II," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 23, June, pp.3-15, 14. [return]
4. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, p.156; Morgan, 1982, p.6; Cruz, 1984, p.53; Antonacci, 2000, p.33. [return]
5. Stevenson & Habermas, 1981, p.156; Morgan, 1982, p.6; 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, p.53; De Vincenzo, 1994. "12 Reasons Why I Cannot Accept the Carbon-14 Test Results on the Holy Shroud of Turin," Shroud News No 82, April, pp.3-13, 8; Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.33. [return]
6. Barbet, 1953, pp.28-29; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 27. [return]
7. Bulst, 1957, pp.74, 144. [return]
8. Antonacci, 2000, p.235. [return]
9. Bulst, 1957, p.144 n.219. [return]

Posted: 30 December 2019. Updated: 8 March 2020.

Tuesday, December 17, 2019

Flower & plant images #31: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!

FLOWER & PLANT IMAGES #31
Copyright © Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is the thirteenth and final installment of part #31, "Other marks and images: Flower & plant images," of my series, "The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!" For more information about this series, see the "Main index #1" and "Other marks and images #26." See also, "The Shroud of Turin: 2.6. The other marks (4): Plant images." Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated.

[Main index #1] [Previous: Dirt #30] [Next: Coins over the eyes #32]


    Other marks and images #26
    1. Flower & plant images #31

Introduction There are images of flowers and plants on the Shroud[2].

[Above (enlarge): Image of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower (circled in red) on the Shroud[3]. This is one of the clearest flower image on the Shroud[4]. Even Ian Wilson who had previously dismissed the flower images on the Shroud as seeing "faces in the clouds"[5], had to admit that "Faint flower-like shapes are quite definitely there on the cloth itself" and "in the case of the chrysanthemum, a flower-like shape was undeniably there"[6]!]

Oswald Scheuermann In 1983 German physics teacher Oswald Scheuermann (1933-2019) noticed flower images on photographs of the Shroud[7]. In that same year Scheuermann wrote of his discovery to Dr. Alan D. Whanger (1930-2017), a Duke University Professor of Psychiatry[8], with whom he had been corresponding about experiments with high-voltage corona discharges[9] to produce

[Above: One of Scheuermann's corona discharge images of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower (left), a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower image visible on the Shroud (centre) and a drawing of a Chrysanthemum coronarium flower in Flora Palaestina (right)[10]]

Shroud-like images[11]. Scheuermann used a Van de Graaf generator which produced high-voltage, high-frequency electricity[12]. This form of electricity flows over the surfaces of all objects in its field, discharging from irregular surfaces and high points in the form of streamers or corona[13]. Scheuermann produced corona images from plant parts, including leaves, stems, thorns, as well as flowers in various stages of wilting, fruits, and bouquets[14]. Scheuermann also produced corona discharge images on linen[15].

Corona discharge also explains why the Shroudman's hair and beard

[Above (enlarge)[16]: In this photographic negative of the Shroudman's head, his hair hangs stiffly out from the side of his head, when he was lying on his back in the tomb, and his hair and beard are dark, when they should appear white as the bloodflows do. As pointed out by Shroud sceptic Joe Nickell, this is "the opposite of what would be expected of a Palestinian Jew in his thirties"[17], and his "hair hangs as for a standing, rather than reclining figure"[18].]

are not dark, when if he was a Jew they would have been. Corona discharge also explains why the man's hair stands out from his head,

[Above (enlarge): "The classic is holding your hands on the [Van de Graaf generator] metal sphere as it charges, the results really can be hair-raising!"[19]. Note that not only did the corona discharge from a Van de Graaf generator cause the man above's hair to stand out from his head, it also caused part of his brown hair to appear white!]

when it would normally have fallen vertically down to the surface upon which the man's body lay. As Prof. Giulio Fanti responded:

"Even if the body image is not a true negative of the reproduced body, it globally appears as such, in a first approximation. For example the hair that in the Pia's plate are almost white, then typical of an old man, they were not probably of that color. This result was achieved on the Relic because all the anatomic elements enveloped in the Cloth interacted with the linen fabric in a similar way independently from their own color. The most probable effect that caused that image, as it was previously discussed, was the corona discharge ... in this context it must be evidenced that the point effect (that yields in correspondence of little curvature radii) which causes a local increase of the electrical discharges intensity, well explains why the hair, geometrically constituted by many cylinders having very little radii, imprinted their image better than many other body parts"[20].
So once again (see "X-rays #22"), what was thought to be evidence against the Shroud's authenticity has become among the best evidence for it!

Alan D. Whanger As previously mentioned, in 1983 Oswald Scheuermann had written to Dr. Alan D. Whanger (1930-2017) [Right [21]] that there were flower images on photographs of the Shroud but at the time Whanger and his wife Mary could not see any[22]. Whanger's Shroud research involved working with high-quality, large size copies of Giuseppe Enrie's 1931 monochrome photographs of the Shroud[23]. Then in 1985, out of the corner of his eye, Whanger noticed a flower image above and to the left of the Shroud man's head[24]. Whanger acquired the six-volume set of the definitive study on the botany of Israel, Zohary's "Flora Palaestina" (1966)][25]. From "Flora Palaestina" Whanger identified the first flower he had seen as that of Chrysanthemum coronarium[26], which grows throughout Israel,

[Above (enlarge): Flowers of Glebionis coronarium, formerly Chrysanthemum coronarium[27].]

including the Judean Mountains, the region that includes Jerusalem.

[Left (enlarge)[28]: Distribution map of Chrysanthemum coronarium, with approximate location of Jerusalem marked by a red dot.]

Whanger spent the next four years painstakingly comparing the faint images on Shroud photographs with life-size drawings in the botany books[29], and using his Polarized Image Overlay technique to check his findings[30]. By 1989, he had tentatively identified images on the Shroud of 28 species of plants that grow in Israel[31]. Of these, 23 are flowers, three are small bushes, and two are thorns[32]. All 28 grow in Israel[33] (see Geographic indicators below).

Avinoam Danin Although Whanger showed his findings to other Shroud researchers, he did not publish them until they could be confirmed by Avinoam Danin (1939–2015) [Below right (enlarge)[34]], Professor of Botany at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a world authority on the flora of Israel[35]. In 1995 the Whangers visited Danin's home in Jerusalem and showed him some of their photographs of the Shroud and Danin confirmed that they contained images of plants from around Jerusalem[36]! In 1997 Danin visited the Whangers in their Durham, North Carolina home, and made a careful and detailed examination of the Whanger's Shroud photographs[37]. Danin not only confirmed almost all of Whanger's identifications, but he also discovered a number of additional flower images that were not found by Whanger[38].

Geographic indicators Of the 28 species of plants that the Whangers had identified images of on the Shroud, 27 grow within the close vicinity of Jerusalem[39], where four geographical areas containing different specific climates and flora can be found[40]. The 28th plant grows at the south end of the Dead Sea[41]. All 28 would have been available in Jerusalem markets in a fresh state[42], and most would have been growing along the roadside and/or in nearby fields[43]. While three of these plants grow in France and nine grow in Italy, half are found only in the Middle East or other similar areas and never in Europe[44]. One of these plants, Zygophyllum dumosum [Left (enlarge)[45]], grows only in Israel, Jordan, or the Sinai, with its northernmost boundary between Jerusalem and Jericho[46]. Two other plants, the images of which Danin identified on the Shroud are, Gundelia tourne-fortii[47] and Cistus creticus[48]. G. tournefortii's dist-ribution is Middle Eastern, extending from western Turkey through Israel, Syria and northern Iraq, Iran and the southernmost fringes of the former Soviet Union[49]. Cistus creticus grows across the

[Above: Distribution map showing the only place on earth where three of the plant species whose images are found on the Shroud: Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum and Cistus creticus, are all found growing together[50], the area around Jerusalem (green circle)[51]!]

Mediterranean zone in western Israel with a desert boundary to the east of Jerusalem[52]. Danin concluded that there is only one place in the world where these three species of plants can be found growing together - between Hebron and Jerusalem[53], a distance of only ~28 kilometres (~18 miles)!

Temporal indicators Furthermore, the blooming time of Chrysanthemum coronarium is from March to May[54]; that of Zygophyllum dumosum is between December and April[55]; Cistus creticus blooms from March to June[56], and Gundelia tournefortii from March to May[57]. The blooming time common to these four plant species, images of which are imprinted on the Shroud, is between March and April[58]. Moreover, of the Whangers' images of 28 species of plants they identified on the Shroud, 27 bloom in March and Apri[59]! And Jesus was crucified on 7 April 30 or 3 April 33[60]!

Pollen There is also a strong correlation between the flower images and pollen grains found on the Shroud[61]. For example, Danin and Whanger, along with Uri Baruch, an expert in the pollen of Israel, have also identified numerous images and pollen of three thorny plants[62]. One of these plants left over ninety pollen grains and is found only in and around Israel[63]. Of the 28 plants identified by Whanger, Max Frei (1913-83) had previously identified the pollens of 25 of them: 21 correct to the species level, 3 to the genus level, and one to the family level[64]. Frei had identified pollen on his tape 6B/d as that of Cistus creticus[65].

[Right (enlarge)[66]: Max Frei's tape grid reference map showing location (red arrow) of his tape 6B/d. The spear wound in the man's apparent left side, and the shadowy details themselves, show that Frei's map was based on a positive photograph of the Shroud (see Shroud Scope).]

Whanger had discovered images of a cluster of Cistus creticus plants on the Shroud at the location of Frei's tape 6B/d, so he informed archaeologist Paul C. Maloney (1936-2018) who Whanger knew was examining microscope slides of those tapes, that he ought to find the pollens of Cistus creticus on that particular slide[67]. Maloney replied that he had been going over that very slide with a pollen expert [Anthony Orville Dahl (1910-2003)] a few days before, and the pollen expert had noted that there were a number of pollens of Cistus creticus on the slide[68]. This discovery of Maloney, predicted by Whanger, proves beyond reasonable doubt that Frei's identification of Shroud pollen was non-fraudulent (as alleged by anti-authenticists[69]) and largely correct:

"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 [native to Israel and the Mediterranean[70]] ... 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"[71]!
This was in the centre of a flower image that Danin had also identified

[Left (enlarge)[72]: "Location of plant parts on the cloth," identified by Danin. The spear wound in the man's apparent right side, and the sharper details, show that this is a mirror-reversed negative photograph of the Shroud (see Shroud Scope). Danin's key states, "2. Cistus creticus flowers." Allowing for Frei's pollen map (above) being based on a positive photograph of the Shroud and Danin's plant parts map (left) being based on a negative, it can be seen that Frei's location 6B/d and Danin's "(2)" are the same location on the Shroud.]

as Cistus creticus[73]! So to "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" at the same location can be added Prof. Avinoam Danin! This is even more proof beyond reasonable doubt that Frei's identification of Shroud pollen was non-fraudulent and largely correct!

Problem for the forgery theory. (See previous three: #28, #29 and #30). A medieval forger: 1) would not have known about flowers and plants that are native to Israel and the Middle East; 2) even if he did, he would not have taken the time and effort to imprint flowers and plants that are barely visible onto his forged Shroud; and 3) and he could not have used a Van de Graaf generator which was invented by American physicist Robert J. Van de Graaff in 1929 to imprint his flower and plant images on the Shroud!

Resurrection of Jesus! Clearly dead bodies don't generate high voltage electrostatic electricity to imprint their image and the images of flowers laid on them onto their burial shrouds. But the resurrected (or resurrecting) body of Jesus could have. Whanger wrote:

"There is no way to prove that the Resurrection is what created the images that are found on the Shroud of Turin. But the circumstantial evidence for that is very strong indeed ... Our studies of the images of the wilted flowers indicate that their images were made probably between twenty-four and thirty-six hours after being picked ... As to the place of origin of the images, in addition to all that is mentioned above, the flower images that are on the Shroud are, in the words of Danin, `the flowers of Jerusalem.' Of the twenty-eight species of flowers thus far identified, twenty-seven grow within five areas measuring three by three miles immediately around Jerusalem and between Jerusalem and Jericho. There is no other place anywhere in the world where this concentration of species is found. One of these species is endemic to Israel, Jordan, and Sinai. For Danin, the presence of images of this one species is sufficient to establish Jerusalem as the place of origin of the Shroud images"[73].
I disagree with Whanger's "There is no way to prove ..." This is a Fallacy of Equivocation on the word "prove." If Whanger means there is no experimental proof that the flower images on the Shroud were imprinted on it by radiation emitted by Jesus' resurrecting body, then that goes without saying because the resurrection of Jesus was a unique event that cannot be repeated in a laboratory. But Whanger has himself claimed that:
"In a court of law, fourteen points of congruence (PC) are sufficient to determine the same source for simple images such as fingerprints; for more complicated images such as a face, forty-five to sixty PC are enough to declare the faces to be the same"[74].
and,
"Polarized image overlays revealed seventy-four points of congruence (PC) between the image on the right eye of the Shroud and Filas's lituus lepton, and seventy-three PC between the left eye image and the Joulia lepton! Remember, in a court of law it takes only fourteen PC to establish [the] same source of fingerprints"[75].
What does Whanger mean above by "sufficient to determine" and "to establish" in the context of "a court of law," if not "proof" beyond reasonable doubt?

There is currently a major criminal trial proceeding in Perth, Western Australia, regarding the "Claremont serial killings." A former telephone company technician, Bradley Robert Edwards, has been charged with the abduction, rape and murder of three young women, of whom the bodies of only two have been recovered. The circumstantial evidence for Edwards having killed the three women includes (from news articles): 1) Edwards has confessed to the rape of other young women; 2) his DNA recovered from one of his confessed rapes matches that found under the fingernails of one of the dead women; 3) fibres from his distinctive telephone company uniform and car were found on the victims' clothes; and 4) a distinctive pocketknife issued by the same telephone company Edwards had worked for was found near one of the victims and Edwards had lost his company pocketknife at that time and it had been replaced. Presumably Edwards will be found guilty and imprisoned for life, based on this strong, multi-faceted circumstantial evidence.

Yet the circumstantial evidence is even stronger for the Shroud of Turin being Jesus' burial shroud, recorded in the Gospels (Mt 27:59; Mk 15:46; Lk 23:53). And included in that evidence, is evidence amounting to proof beyond reasonable doubt that the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus as His body had been (or was being) resurrected, i.e. as described by Ian Wilson put it, a `snapshot' of the Resurrection":

"Even from the limited available information, a hypothetical glimpse of the power operating at the moment of creation of the Shroud's image may be ventured. In the darkness of the Jerusalem tomb the dead body of Jesus lay, unwashed, covered in blood, on a stone slab. Suddenly, there is a burst of mysterious power from it. In that instant ... its image ... becomes indelibly fused onto the cloth, preserving for posterity a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection"[76]!
Here are posts in this series (which I will add to over time in the background) which present the evidence that the the image on the Shroud is indeed, a `snapshot' of Jesus' resurrection: "No style #16", "Non-directional #17," "Superficial #18," "Negative #19," "Three-dimensional #20," ...

To be continued in the next part #32 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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. & Baruch, U., 1998, "Floristic Indicators for the Origin of the Shroud of Turin," Paper presented at the Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, 6 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, p.205; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, p.28; 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.108; Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, pp.74, 78,80,84-85; Whanger, A. & Whanger, M., 1999, "The Real Date of the Shroud: The Visual Evidence," in Walsh, B., ed., 2000, "Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia," Magisterium Press: Glen Allen VA, pp.76-77; 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.84,86; Guerrera, V., 2001, "The Shroud of Turin: A Case for Authenticity," TAN: Rockford IL, p.150; Milne, L., 2005, "A Grain of Truth: How Pollen Brought a Murderer to Justice," New Holland: Frenchs Forest, NSW, Australia, p.94; Danin, A., 2010, "Botany of the Shroud: The Story of Floral Images on the Shroud of Turin," Danin Publishing: Jerusalem, Israel, pp.8, 10, 12; Oxley, M., 2010, "The Challenge of the Shroud: History, Science and the Shroud of Turin," AuthorHouse: Milton Keynes UK, pp.258-259. [return]
3. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical, Sindonology.org. [return]
4. Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 1999, "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, p.16. [return]
5. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.92. [return]
6. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.87, 92. [return]
7. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Danin, et al., 1999, pp.7,9; Maloney, P.C., 1999, "A Contribution toward a History of Botanical Research on the Shroud of Turin," in Walsh, B., ed., Proceedings of the 1999 Shroud of Turin International Research Conference, Richmond, Virginia, p.251; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Milne, 2005, p.93; 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, 141; Oxley, 2010, p.258. [return]
8. Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 28; Wilson, I., 1991, "Holy Faces, Secret Places: The Quest for Jesus' True Likeness," Doubleday: London, p.167. [return]
9. Danin, et al., 1999, p.10; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.140; Danin, 2010, p.38. [return]
10. Council for Study of the Shroud of Turin, 2015, "Chrysanthemum coronarium from Flora Palaestina; drawing courtesy Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities, corona image by Scheuermann," CSST Still Image Gallery, 22 July. [return]
11. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.28. [return]
12. Danin, A., et al., 1999, p.10. [return]
13. Ibid. [return]
14. Ibid; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141. [return]
15. Ibid. [return]
16. Extract from Latendresse, M., 2010, Shroud Scope: Enrie Negative Vertical, Sindonology.org. [return]
17. Nickell, J., 2007, "Relics of the Christ," The University Press of Kentucky: Lexington KY, p.140. [return]
18. Nickell, J., 2005, "Voice of Reason: The Truth Behind the Shroud of Turin," Livescience, 18 March. [return]
19. "Experiments - Van de Graaff Generator," Physikanten & Co.," 2019. [return]
20. Fanti, G. & Basso, R., 2008, "Turin Shroud: Optical Research in the Past Present and Future," Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY, p.14. [return]
21. "In Memory of Alan Duane Whanger," Cremation Society of the Carolinas, October 21, 2017. [return]
22. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
23. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.72. [return]
24. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.71; Maloney, 1999, p.251; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
25. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.141; Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
26. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.74; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.86. [return]
27. "Glebionis coronarium (L.) N.N. Tzvel," Flora of Israel Online by Prof. Avinoam Danin, 2013-2019. [return]
28. Ibid. [return]
29. Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
30. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
31. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Danin, 2010, p.9; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
32. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Guerrera, 2001, p.149; Danin, 2010, p.9; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
33. Iannone, 1998, p.28; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Danin, 2010, p.9; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
34. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.85. [return]
35. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
36. Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
37. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80; Danin & Baruch, 1998, p.203. [return]
38. Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Danin, 2010, p.12. [return]
39. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
40. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
41. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
42. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Iannone, 1998, p.28; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
43. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
44. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
45. Danin, 2010, p.17. [return]
46. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.80; Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
47. Danin, 2010, p.54. [return]
48. Danin, 2010, p.54. [return]
49. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.88. [return]
50. Danin, 2010, p.52. [return]
51. Danin, et al., 1999, pp.21-22. [return]
52. Danin, 2010, p.17. [return]
53. Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
54. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
55. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
56. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
57. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22. [return]
58. Danin, et al., 1999, p.22; Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Danin, 2010, p.8. [return]
59. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78. [return]
60. Finegan, J., 1964, "Handbook of Biblical Chronology: Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible," Princeton University Press: Princeton NJ, pp.296, 300; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.263; Whanger & Whanger, 1998, p.78; Whanger & Whanger, 1999, pp.76-77; Baima-Bollone, P., "Images of Extraneous Objects on the Shroud," in Scannerini, S. & Savarino, P., eds, 2000, "The Turin Shroud: Past, Present and Future," International scientific symposium, Turin, 2-5 March 2000," Effatà: Cantalupa, pp.131, 133; Doig, K.F., 2015, "Doig's Biblical Chronology: Part IV, The Crucifixion of Jesus." [return]
61. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
62. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
63. Antonacci, 2000, p.112. [return]
64. Antonacci, 2000, p.112; Whanger & Whanger, 2008, p.142. [return]
65. Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.86. [return]
66. Baima Bollone, P. & Gagli, A., 1984, "Demonstration of Blood, Aloes and Myrrh on the Holy Shroud with Immunofluorescence Techniques," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 13, December, pp.2-8, 2. [return]
67. Whanger, A.D. & Whanger, M., 1991, "Evidence of early origin and nature of the Shroud of Turin by image analysis and optical comparison," Shroud News, No 65, June, pp.8-18, 14. [return]
68. Whanger & Whanger, 1991, p.14. [return]
69. Nickell, J., 1994, "Pollens on the 'shroud': a study in deception," Skeptical Inquirer, June 22; Schafersman, S.D., 1998, "Unraveling the Shroud of Turin," Approfondimento Sindone, Vol. 2. [return]
70. Danin, et al., 1999, p.16; Danin, 2010, p.54. [return]
71. Whanger & Whanger, 1998, pp.78-79; Whanger, A., 1996, "Pollens on the Shroud: A Study in Deception," Shroud Spectrum International, No. 97, September, pp.11-18, 17. [return]
72. Danin, A., 2003, "Contribution of the Plants in Determining the Authenticity of the Shroud," Flora of Israel Online. [return]
73. Danin, et al., 1999, p.16; 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; Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.86. [return]
74. Whanger & Whanger, 1991, pp.19-20. [return]
75. Whanger & Whanger, 1991, p.26. [return]
76. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.251; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p..234. [return]

Posted: 17 December 2019. Updated: 31 December 2019.

Monday, December 16, 2019

My Shroud blog: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #6

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!
MY SHROUD BLOG
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is "My Shroud blog," part #6, of my online book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" For more information see the Cover, part #1 and Contents #2 of this series.

[Contents #2] [Previous: About me #5] [Next: My position on the Shroud #7]


  1. Preface #3
    1. My Shroud blog #6

In June 2007 I started my The Shroud of Turin blog (https://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/). In January 2019 it passed 1 million pageviews. It is, as far as I am aware, the only English-speaking pro-authenticist Shroud blog.


To be continued in part #6 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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]

Posted: 16 December 2019. Updated: 12 February 2020.

Wednesday, December 11, 2019

"News and Editorial," Shroud of Turin News, November 2019

Shroud of Turin News - November 2019
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

[Previous: October 2019, part #1] [Next: December 2019, part #1]

This is the November 2019 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. I have listed below linked news article(s) about the Shroud in November as a service to readers, without necessarily endorsing any of them. My comments are bold in square brackets.


News:
• "Shroud of Turin: Interview with Researcher Who Debunked the 1988 `Medieval' Dating," Townhall, Myra Kahn Adams, 3 November 2019 ... In mid-July, I wrote a piece that was popular with Townhall readers headlined: "Shroud of Turin: New Test Concludes 1988 `Medieval Hoax' Dating Was a Fraud." The headline reflected the conclusion of French researcher Tristan Casabianca [Right [2]] and his team of scientists, who in March published their results in the scholarly journal Archaeometry titled: "Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence from Raw Data." In 2017, Casabianca took legal action to obtain the raw data used in the controversial 1988 radiocarbon dating test on the Shroud of Turin — data that had been deliberately sequestered for three decades. Disputed by scientists from day one, the test results concluded with "95% confidence" that the Shroud ... was dated between 1260 and 1390. Shroud scientists are optimistic that Casabianca's breakthrough, obtaining and retesting the 1988 raw data with contrary results, will increase pressure on the Vatican to authorize new comprehensive 21st century Shroud testing. The following interview was conducted by email from Casabianca's home in Paris, France ... `I realized how much the radiocarbon test's medieval date conclusion still resonated within the Shroud scientific community and negatively impacted public opinion — despite newer evidence dating the cloth to the First Century. And, since nearly 30 years had passed, I wanted to try to put an end to this dating controversy ... I thought: What actions were never taken to obtain the raw data? Thanks to my legal background, the answer was obvious: A request based on the Freedom of Information Act ... More intriguing is that since March, the authors and institutions of the Nature article ... have been invited to reply, and, as of this writing, have not ... I am highly confident that in the next few years, the failure of the Turin Shroud radiocarbon dating will largely be admitted by scientists ...'" [See my comment below after the next article.]]

• "The Shroud of Turin Was Declared a Fraud. New Research Has Some Asking for a Retrial," The Daily Beast, 24 November 2019, Candida Moss ... In the 1980s, carbon testing led to a guilty verdict for the Shroud of Turin as a fraud. But researchers who pursued a legal case for the original data say it's far from certain ... For the past 600 years [sic] Christians have venerated the Shroud of Turin as a precious relic ... even proof of the reality of the resurrection. Then, in 1988, three laboratories based at top universities performed radiocarbon analysis of some of its threads. The results were collected and collated by the British Museum in London and published in a splashy article in the prestigious Nature magazine that claimed to offer definitive proof that the Shroud was a medieval fraud. Oddly the original data was unavailable to researchers. But in 2017, a legal request under the Freedom of Information Act obtained the raw information for the first time. Their results, published recently in Archaeometry, show that the issue of the dating of the Turin Shroud is far from settled ... most people thought that the radiocarbon dating would be the silver bullet that would either confirm the inauthenticity of the Shroud or dispel Shroud doubters once and for all. Vatican agreement for testing took decades to obtain and then, finally, in 1987, laboratories in Arizona, Oxford, and Zurich were selected to perform independent tests. On April 21, 1988, a sample was taken from one corner of the cloth and distributed to the three sets of scientists. The resulting publication declared that there was `conclusive evidence' that the linen of the shroud dates to 1260-1390 CE with 95 percent confidence in those results. Since 2005, however, a growing number of scholars have questioned the results of the now 30-year-old tests. Some claimed, for example, that the area tested was a portion of the cloth that was repaired and that the tested strands reflect those repairs ... The fact that testing only used samples from one corner of the cloth makes it impossible to know if this is a claim is correct or not. Oddly, though, neither academic institutions involved or the British Museum would respond to requests for the original raw data that were held in their archives. (The British Museum also did not respond to a request for comment from The Daily Beast.) It was only when Tristan Casabianca made a request under British law that he received a favourable reply. According to his co-authored article in Archaeometry, the British Museum `made all its files ... available' to his team. What Casabianca and co-authors ... discovered is that the results were less conclusive than the Nature article suggests ... What should interest everyone is how hard it was for researchers to obtain copies of the raw data produced during the radiocarbon testing. The British Museum had repeatedly denied requests for the raw data. Bioarchaeologist Dr. Kristina Killgrove, who was not involved in working on the Turin Shroud, told The Daily Beast that `it makes some sense to release info to researchers who want to check it / build on it (and not to release data completely publicly). But to refuse to release data is a big red flag.' Making data available publicly is important Killgrove added, because `replicability is the cornerstone of science, and science can't progress without the publication of raw data.' ... It's also easy to understand why people of faith might be concerned by the strange reluctance of scientists to release their results in full. Perhaps new testing is needed to put the debate to bed once and for all ... [Since the evidence is overwhelming that the Shroud is authentic, and therefore 1st century, its 13th-14th century radiocarbon date, must be the result of fraud, i.e. a computer hacking! Moreover, the Nature article itself is fraudulent [see 15Jul18, 17Feb19 & 29May19], as the laboratories and the British Museum's refusal to release their raw data until the latter was forced to, shows they know it was. So what first must happen is that the Nature article be retracted [see 04Oct18, 29Nov18, 18Dec18, 10Mar19 & 29May19].]

Editorial
Posts: In November I blogged four new posts (latest uppermost): "AMS: Turin Shroud Encyclopedia," - 10th; "Contents: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #2," - 9th; "News and Editorial," Shroud of Turin News, September 2019," - 5th; "Cover: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #1," - 4th.

Comments: Comments in November included:
November 1, 2019 at 7:46 AM My reply to an anonymous comment under my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Sixteenth century (1)" post asking me to not forget to inform readers about my book progress when writing my editorial. I replied that, '... I always do. I have a permanent "My book" section in my monthly Shroud of Turin News posts and as mentioned in the August issue, "my target date for publication of my book is 2025" when "The next public viewing [of the Shroud] is scheduled ..."

November 2, 2019 at 7:37 AM My reply to a Charles P Arnold, Jr under my 2008 post, "Are the three Hebrew letters on the Shroud tsade-'aleph-waw: `you will come out'?" which was, "... `lamb' makes

[Above (enlarge): 3D hologram showing three Hebrew or Aramaic letters under the beard of the man on the Shroud: "The Shroud of Turin: The Holographic Experience," Missouri Botanical Garden, 2008. These are more clearly seen with red and green anaglyph 3D `spectacles'. ]

no sense" and "... speculating what the three Hebrew or Aramaic letters on the Shroud may mean is missing the main point which is, `they ARE Hebrew or Aramaic letters'"! That is because a medieval forger: 1) would be unlikely to know Hebrew or Aramaic letters, unless he was Jewish; 2) if he did know Hebrew or Aramaic letters, a medieval forger would be unlikely to depict them on his forged Shroud because his medieval European mostly Gentile contemporaries would be unlikely to recognise them; and 3) if a medieval forger did depict three Hebrew or Aramaic letters on his forged Shroud, he would be unlikely to chose three with an obscure meaning, but would more likely chose letters which spelled the Hebrew or Aramaic equivalent of "Jesus" or "Messiah," etc.

Updates In November there were no significant updates in the background of my past posts.

Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud. As we saw above, I blogged one post, "AMS: Turin Shroud Encyclopedia" on the Shroud's 1988 radiocarbon dating.

My book: On 31 October I ceased writing my word-processed book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" when I found that I was getting too bogged down with fine details, such that I had become increasingly worried that at almost (now) 73 years of age, I may never finish it. So I decided to start writing my book online, with the aim of eventually basing a word-processed version on that. Also, if I never finished my online book, at least I would have placed some of it in the public domain! So on 4 November I posted "Cover: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #1" (below) followed by "Contents:

[Above (enlarge): The no longer planned but actual cover of my online book!]

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #2" on 9 November. I intend that every second post will be a section of my book.

Pageviews: At midnight on 30 November, Google Analytics [Below (enlarge)] gave this blog's "Pageviews all time history" as 1,122,980.

This compares with 985,345 at the same time in November 2018. That is 137,635 pageviews over the year, or an average of ~377 pageviews per day.

Google Analytics also gave the most viewed posts for November (highest uppermost) as: "Introduction #2: The evidence is overwhelming that the Turin Shroud is authentic!," Jul 9, 2015 - 236; "`according to John chapter 20, Jesus was wrapped in linen cloths (plural) ... If Scripture is correct ... lets throw out the shroud'," Jul 11, 2012 - 115; "`Or the artist of the fake shroud knew of the Pray Manuscript and incorporated these signs into his forgery?'," May 19, 2012 - 98; "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: AD 30 to the present: 1st century and Index," Jul 24, 2016 - 82 & "Problems of the Turin Shroud forgery theory: Index A-F," Jan 20, 2016 - 81

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "Amazon.fr: Tristan Casabianca: Livres, Biographie, écrits, livres audio, Kindle," 2019. [return]

Posted: 11 December 2019. Updated: 22 February 2020.

Tuesday, December 10, 2019

About me: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #5

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!
ABOUT ME
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is "About me," part #5, of my online book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" For more information see the Cover, part #1 and Contents #2.

[Contents #2] [Previous: This book #4] [Next: My Shroud blog #6]


  1. Preface #3
    1. About me #5

I am a Protestant evangelical Christian in my seventies, converted to Christianity from Deism and before that Atheism, in 1967. For many years, to the extent that I thought about it at all, I assumed that the Shroud of Turin was just another fake Roman Catholic relic.

I remember reading a newspaper article in the late 1980s that the Shroud had been radiocarbon dated and found to be a medieval fake[2].

But in January 2005 I found in a secondhand bookstall a book, "Verdict on the Shroud" (1981) [Right [3]], which was co-authored by Gary Habermas. I knew from Habermas' other writings that he was a sound, evidence-based, evangelical Christian philosopher, so I bought the book.

I was amazed at the evidence that Habermas and his co-author Ken Stevenson presented for the Shroud being the burial sheet of Jesus mentioned in the Gospels (Matthew 27:59; Mark 15:46 & Luke 23:53).

Soon after that I read an online article based on a scientific journal paper which claimed that the Shroud was thousands of years old and therefore its medieval radiocarbon date was wrong[4].

So I then provisionally, and later fully, accepted that the Shroud is indeed the very burial sheet of Jesus!


To be continued in part #6 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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. "Church admits shroud is a fake," The West Australian, 14 October 1988, p.5. [return]
3. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI. [return]
4. Lorenzi, R., 2005, "Turin shroud older than thought," ABC/Discovery News, 26 January. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2005/01/26/1289491.htm. [return]

Posted: 10 December 2019. Updated: 23 December 2019.

Friday, December 6, 2019

`Is the Shroud of Turin authentic? Or is it a forgery?' #2

© Stephen E. Jones[1]

This is part #2 of my multi-post response to Cserhati, M. & Carter, R., 2019, "Is the Shroud of Turin authentic? Or is it a forgery?" Creation.com, 16 August. See my reply comment of 22Aug19. As previously mentioned, I will confine my response to the article's "Summary" but refer to the main article as I do. Emphases are mine unless otherwise indicated. The article's words are bold to distinguish them from mine.

[Previous: part #1] [Next: part #3]

Morphology: Several features of the man in the Shroud appear to be distorted, In the main article Cserhati & Carter (hereafter C&C) claim the major instance of "distortion" is, "... the width of the right leg is twice that of the left leg above the knee on the frontal image, but not on the dorsal image" and they answer their own objection, "however this might be due to distortion of the Shroud image based on the way it was (presumably) draped across the body"[2]. But their claim is false that, "the width of the right leg is twice that of the left leg above the knee on the frontal image." As can be seen in this full-length image, the width of the legs above the knees (marked by flagrum wounds) is about the same. C&C are

[Right (enlarge)[3]. The man's right leg is the one on the same side as the speared in the side wound (Jn 19:33-34) [opposite], which is in the man's right side[4].]

confusing a longitudinal feature of the weave which runs down the Shroud, including between the legs, with the right leg itself!

and he is unusually tall, compared to the average height of a first-century Jewish man. In their article C&C cite pro-Shroud authors Mark Antonacci that the height of the man in the Shroud is 5 ft 10 in[5] and Thomas de Wesselow that it is 6 ft[6]. Both Antonacci and de Wesselow (and therefore C&C) seem unaware that STURP's John Jackson had in the 1970s experimentally established that the height of

[Above (enlarge)[7]: "Dr John Jackson and colleagues with a life-sized mock-up or working replica of the Shroud [left], and volunteers recruited to 'fit' the cloth ... [right] ... Jackson ... found the closest 'fit' to the Shroud to have been ... 5 ft 11 in (180 cm)"[8].]

the man on the Shroud was 5ft 11 in. (180 cm)[9]. But to C&C "this doesn't matter much" because "people were shorter in times past" (which Ian Wilson disputes, pointing out that, "human height has changed relatively little during the last several thousand years" and "one of ten adult skeletons in a Jerusalem cemetery from Jesus' time was found to have been a six-footer"[10]) "and even today the mean height of Jewish males in different parts of the world is at most 1.71 m (5 ft 7 in)"[11] (which contradicts their first point)! C&C further undermine their argument by admitting that, "it is not inconceivable that Jesus was tall for his time" but then they fallaciously claim, "the height of the man in the Shroud makes it less likely that this really was Jesus Christ"[12]. If that were so then to be consistent C&C would have to say that it was "less likely" the Bible was correct when it states that Israel's first king Saul was, "From his shoulders upward ... taller than any of the people" (1Sam 9:2)! Jesus may well have been, like Saul, of above average height. In Jn 7:37, "Jesus," in the midst of a great crowd celebrating the Feast of Tabernacles, "stood and cried out, `If anyone thirsts, let him come to me and drink.'" The Greek histēmi translated "stood" means "was standing" not "rose to His feet"[13]. This implies (if not requires) that Jesus was indeed taller than average, otherwise most of the crowd could not have seen who the "me" was that they should come to!

Also, he was clearly not wrapped in the cloth, as the image does not show the sides of the head or body. C&C don't even mention this in their main article! C&C confuse two separate things: 1) the wrapping of the man's body in a burial shroud; and 2) the imprinting of an image of his body on that shroud. It does not follow that because only images of the front and back of the man's body was imprinted on the Shroud, not of his sides, crown of his head or soles of his feet, that he was not completely enveloped in the Shroud. STURP also showed experimentally in the 1970s that image density points on the Shroud relating to cloth-body distance conform to a single global mathematical mapping function[14] (below), proving that the Shroud

[Above enlarge: "Correlation of image intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D structure of a human body shape"[15]. That is, "the Shroud image is consistent with the drape that would be expected from a cloth covering a human body ... `the frontal image on the Shroud of Turin is shown to be consistent with a naturally draping cloth in the sense that image shading can be derived from a single global mapping function of distance between these two surfaces'"[16]]

did indeed fully wrap a real human body. C&C don't ask themselves why would a forger (or a Maillard Reaction - their preferred explanation - see future part #3) "not show the sides of the head or body"?

The only explanation which fits the facts is that the Shroudman's image was imprinted on the Shroud cloth by a burst of vertically collimated (straight up and down[17]) radiant energy. To conclude this part #2 I will confine myself to quotes from Antonacci's 2000 book, Resurrection of the Shroud, because C&C refer to him (albeit not to that book - see part #1 on C&C's inadequate references list):

"It is extremely difficult to imagine how the subtle shades of light and dark on the Shroud's body images could possibly have been obtained without using light or radiation. These body images are not saturated or diffused. The edges of the man's body at the sides, top, and bottom break off sharply. Furthermore, the agent, acting at a distance, barely penetrated the cloth. As one noted scientist who has studied the Shroud for more than two decades observed, `An agent acting at a distance with decreasing intensity is, almost by definition, radiation. The limitation of the cloth darkening to the outermost surface pointed to a non-penetrating, non-diffusing agent, like radiant energy ...'[18] ... A vertical beam or beams of light or radiation also best explains how the Shroud's body image was encoded through space in a straight line from the body to the cloth. STURP scientist John Heller [1921-1995] stated, `It is as if every pore and every hair of the body contained a microminiature laser'[19]. This vertical directionality of the Shroud body image has only been accounted for by methods involving radiation. As scientist Luigi Gonella [1930-2007] explained, `Whatever the mechanism might be, it must be such to yield effects as if it were a burst of collimated radiant energy'[20]"[21].
And the explanation that fits the facts of vertically collimated radiant energy imprinting the front and back image image of the man on the Shroud, but not his sides, the top of his head or soles of his feet, is John Jackson's "Cloth Collapse" theory (see 18Jan12), as summarised by Antonacci:
"Jackson's [cloth collapse] theory predicts that the Shroud's images would be encoded if the body became insubstantial and emitted ultraviolet light. As the cloth fell through the body region, each point on the cloth would receive a radiation dose in proportion to the time it was within the region. The parts of the cloth that were over the highest points of the supine body (for example, the tip of the nose) would receive the longest dose of radiation, while the parts of the cloth over the lowest points of the body would receive the least. Thus, the intensity of all points on the resultant body image on the two-dimensional cloth would be directly correlated to the distance that they originally were from the surface of the three-dimensional body. Furthermore, since the draped cloth fell by gravity, all points of the resultant body image would have aligned vertically with the corresponding body point below it. Even those parts of the body that were not initially touching the cloth, such as the sides of the nose, would be encoded in a three-dimensional and vertical direction onto the cloth"[22].
Which is compatible (to put it mildly!) with the resurrection of Jesus, as described by Ian Wilson:
"Even from the limited available information, a hypothetical glimpse of the power operating at the moment of creation of the Shroud's image may be ventured. In the darkness of the Jerusalem tomb the dead body of Jesus lay, unwashed, covered in blood, on a stone slab. Suddenly, there is a burst of mysterious power from it. In that instant ... its image ... becomes indelibly fused onto the cloth, preserving for posterity a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection"[23]!
To be continued in part #3 of this series.

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. Cserhati, M. & Carter, R., 2019, "Is the Shroud of Turin authentic? Or is it a forgery?" Creation.com, 16 August. [return]
3. Latendresse, M., 2010, "Shroud Scope: Durante 2002: Horizontal," (rotated left 90°), Sindonology.org. [return]
4. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963, p.129; Borkan, M., 1995, "Ecce Homo?: Science and the Authenticity of the Turin Shroud," Vertices, Duke University, Vol. X, No. 2, Winter, pp.18-51, 26; Iannone, J.C., 1998, "The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence," St Pauls: Staten Island NY, pp.62-63; Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, p.42; de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.12. [return]
5. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.116 [return]
6. de Wesselow, 2012, p.146 [return]
7. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, pp.46-47 [return]
8. Wilson. & Schwortz, 2000, p.47 [return]
9. Ibid [return]
10. Wilson. & Schwortz, 2000, p.143 [return]
11. Cserhati & Carter, 2019. [return]
12. Ibid. [return]
13. Morris, L.L., 1971, "The Gospel According to John," The New International Commentary on the New Testament," Eerdmans: Grand Rapids MI, Reprinted, 1984, p.422. [return]
14. Heller, J.H. & Adler, A.D., 1981, "A Chemical Investigation of 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.34-57, 35; Schwalbe, L.A. & Rogers, R.N., 1982, "Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: Summary of the 1978 Investigation," Reprinted from Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 135, No. 1, pp.3-49, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co: Amsterdam, 1982, pp.7-8; Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, p.138; Jumper, E.J., Adler, A.D., Jackson, J.P., Pellicori, S.F., Heller, J.H., Druzik, J.R., in Lambert, J.B., ed., 1984, "A Comprehensive Examination of the Various Stains and Images on the Shroud of Turin,"Archaeological Chemistry III: ACS Advances in Chemistry, No. 205," American Chemical Society, Washington D.C, pp.447-476, 451, 471; Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1990, "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson: Nashville TN, pp.32, 205. [return]
15. Jackson, et. al, 1984, "Correlation of image intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3-D structure of a human body shape," Applied Optics, Vol. 23, No. 14, pp. 2244-2270. [return]
16. Wilson, I., 1985, "Some Recent Publications," BSTS Newsletter, No. 9, January. [return]
17. Whanger, M. & Whanger, A.D., 1998, "The Shroud of Turin: An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House Publishers: Franklin TN, p.118; Wilson. & Schwortz, 2000, p.35. [return]
18. Gonella, L., 1987, "Scientific Investigation of the Shroud of Turin: Problems, Results and Methodological Lessons," in "Turin Shroud-Image of Christ?," Cosmos: Hong Kong, pp. 29-40, 31. [return]
19. Heller, J., in McDonald, W., 1986, "Science and the Shroud," The World and I, October, pp.420-428, 426.[return]
20. Gonella, 1987, p.31. [return]
21. Antonacci, 2000, pp.212-213. [return]
22. Antonacci, 2000, p.220. [return]
23. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.251; Wilson, 1998, p.234. [return]

Posted: 6 December 2019. Updated: 24 February 2020.

Wednesday, December 4, 2019

This book: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #4

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!
THIS BOOK
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is "This book," part #4 of my online book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" For more information see the Cover, part #1 and Contents #2.

[Contents #2] [Previous: Preface #3] [Next: About me #5]


  1. Preface #3
    1. This book #4

This online book on the Shroud of Turin (hereafter "the Shroud") aims to be scholarly but under-standable to the reader who is new to the Shroud. It also aims to be comprehensive - to include everything of importance in sindonology - the study of the Shroud of Turin[2].


[Right[3]: Ian Wilson's 1978 first book on the Shroud. Although published over 40 years ago, it still is arguably the greatest book on the Shroud ever written!]

Continued in part #5 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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. "sindonology," Dictionary.com, 12 November 2019. [return]
3. Wilson, I., 1978, "The Turin Shroud," Victor Gollancz: London. [return]

Posted: 4 December 2019. Updated: 14 December 2019.

Monday, December 2, 2019

"News and Editorial," Shroud of Turin News, October 2019

Shroud of Turin News - October 2019
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

[Previous: September 2019, part #1] [Next: November 2019, part #1]

This is the October 2019 issue of my Shroud of Turin News. I have listed below linked news article(s) about the Shroud in October as a service to readers, without necessarily endorsing any of them.


News:
• "Stephen Lukasik, physicist turned Pentagon research director, dies at 88," Washington Post, Obituaries, 8 October 2019, Harrison Smith ... Stephen Lukasik [Right (enlarge): "Portrait of Stephen J. Lukasik in 1990"[2]], a physicist who sought to apply advanced technology to national security, overseeing Defense Department research on computer networking, artificial intelligence and the detection of nuclear explosions before becoming a prescient expert on cybersecurity, died Oct. 3 at his home in Falls Church, Va. He was 88 ...":

"A man of wide-ranging interests, Dr. Lukasik amassed a collection of about 15,000 books on subjects including national security, shipwrecks, archaeology and geology, and participated in a 1988 effort to date the Shroud of Turin, venerated by millions of Christians as the burial cloth of Jesus. (Radiocarbon tests indicated the frayed length of linen was created in the Middle Ages, although Dr. Lukasik cast doubts on those findings.)"
See also (which do not mention the Shroud): "Stephen J. Lukasik," Wikipedia, 31 October 2019 & "Stephen Lukasik, 88, Who Pushed Tech in National Defense, Is Dead," The New York Times, 7 October 2019, Katie Hafner.

Lukasik was one of STURP's representatives at the 1986 Turin Workshop on radiocarbon dating the Shroud:

"Lukasik, S (Stephen): Vice President-Technology, Northrup Corporation, Los Angeles. He was in charge of experiments the STURP group hoped to carry out on the shroud. He attended the workshop on dating the Turin Shroud"[3].
But Lukasik is probably unknown to most Shroudies because STURP never carried out its 1988 experiments on the Shroud (`thanks' to the machinations of the anti-Christian Prof. Harry E. Gove (1922-2009) and the weakness of the Turin and Vatican church authorities):
"From 1986 to 1987, Gove lobbied against STURP harder than ever. During this time, the carbon dating laboratories' directors wrote letters to Chagas, and Chagas met personally with the Pope, echoing their complaints about STURP's planned tests. In the summer of 1987, Gove wrote a remarkable letter to Chagas, which contained a number of untrue and unsubstantiated comments that, of course, concerned STURP and even those in Turin. Gove himself stated:
`... I noted that the Shroud had been subjected to a number of scientific tests of dubious value carried out in ill-conceived ways by scientists of unknown reputation ... [false] I stated that almost every aspect of the STURP organization was distasteful ... This included their clear religious zeal, their questionable sources of support [false], their military mind set ...'[3]
... before he finished, he would even compare STURP to the Spanish Inquisition. This time he not only threatened that the carbon dating laboratories would withdraw without Chagas's continued support, he guaranteed their withdrawal `if STURP participates in the carbon dating enterprise in any way" [4, 5]

Editorial
Posts: In October I blogged no new posts because my "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Sixteenth century (1)" began on 25 September and ended on 3 November!

Comments: There were no comments in October worth mentioning.

Updates In October there were no significant updates in the background of my past posts.

Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud. Although I didn't start any new posts in October, I did mention the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud at "1508a" in my 16th century chronology (references omitted):


1508a On 20 February Margaret of Austria draws up her will, giving to the church of Brou, among other relics, a snippet of the Shroud .... Marino and Benford claim that this snippet was taken ... from what later became the 1988 radiocarbon dating area [Below (enlarge) ... and 16th century threads were used to repair the excision, thus giving the first-century Shroud a false 13th-14th century radiocarbon date ... However, see my comment below that:
"... younger carbon contamination and/or threads from a medieval repair included in the radiocarbon dating samples does not, of itself, explain why the first century Shroud had the `bull's eye' 1260-1390 = 1325±65 radiocarbon date. For an explanation of both, see my possible reconciliation of the carbon contamination and/or medieval repair theories with my hacker theory."

My book: In October I continued writing in Word, Chapter 3, "The man point outline of my book, "Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" on my

[Left (enlarge): The planned cover of my book.]

on the Shroud" and in parallel also in Word, "Problems of the Forgery Theory." However, see my post of 04Nov19 where I realised that I was getting too bogged down with fine details, such that I had become increasingly worried that at almost (now) 73 years of age, I may never finish my book. So I decided to start posting here on my blog an online version of my book, with the same name.

Pageviews: At midnight on 31 October, Google Analytics [Below (enlarge)] gave this blog's "Pageviews all time history" as 1,112,790.

This compares with 972,213 at the same time in October 2018. That is 140,577 pageviews over the year, or an average of ~385 pageviews per day.

Google Analytics also gave the most viewed posts for October (highest uppermost) as: "Problems of the Turin Shroud forgery theory: Index A-F," Jan 20, 2016 - 401; Problems of the Turin Shroud forgery theory: Index G-M ," Apr 2, 2016 - 141; "Chronology of the Turin Shroud: Sixteenth century (1)," Sep 25, 2019 - 86; "Is the Shroud of Turin authentic? Or is it a forgery?' #1," Sep 8, 2019 - 75 & "Problems of the Turin Shroud forgery theory: Index S-Z," Jun 18, 2016 - 65.

Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
2. "File:SJLukasik1990.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 6 October 2019. [return]
3. Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, pp.191-192. [return]
4. Gove, 1996, p.192. [return]
5. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.199-200. [return]

Posted: 2 December 2019. Updated: 24 February 2020.

Sunday, December 1, 2019

Preface: The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus! #3

The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!
PREFACE
© Stephen E. Jones
[1]

This is the Preface and part #3 of my online book, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Sheet of Jesus!" For more information see the Cover, part #1 and Contents #2. I am using HTML's automatic numbering of sections. Again, when a topic is linked it has been posted.

[Right (enlarge): Full-length image of the Shroud after the 2002 restoration (Shroud University)]

[Previous: Contents #2] [Next: This book #4]


  1. Preface #3
    1. This book #4
    2. About me #5
    3. My Shroud blog #6
    4. My position on the Shroud #7


To be continued in part #4 of this series.

Notes
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to quote from any part of this post (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]

Posted: 1 December 2019. Updated: 30 December 2019.