[Previous: January-June 2024] [Next: January - June 2025].
This is the twelfth installment of my Shroud of Turin News for July - September 2024. The articles are in date order (earliest first). My words will be in [bold square brackets] to distinguish them from the articles' words.
"5 things you shouldn't miss at the 2024 National Eucharistic Congress," Catholic News Agency, Francesca Pollio Fenton, 17 July 2024 ... There will also be five key exhibits that attendees can visit daily. These are the National Shroud of Turin Exhibit ... Here's a closer look
[Right (enlarge): The National Shroud of Turin Exhibit at the 2024 National Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis. Credit: Ursula Murua/EWTN News]
at these five activities open to all participants at the congress: National Shroud of Turin Exhibit A replica of the incredible 14-foot linen burial shroud will be on display in an interactive and immersive high-tech educational exhibit daily from noon to 6:30 p.m. at the Indiana Convention Center. ... There will also be three 45-minute presentations taking place each day at the exhibit. Dr. Cheryl White will give a talk titled "Jerusalem to Turin: The Shroud's Elusive History," Father Andrew Dalton will discuss how the shroud is a mirror of the Gospel, and Pam McCue will give a talk titled "Power of a Traveling Shroud Exhibit." [I have emailed Prof. White, asking her if there is a transcript of her talk, "Jerusalem to Turin: The Shroud's Elusive History," at the 2024 National Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis? And if so, could she send it to me as a PDF or Word document, that I could post it, or excerpts from it, to my blog?].
"Scientist Converts to Catholicism After Studying the Shroud of Turin: It's a "Photograph of Jesus Himself," ChurchPOP, 19 July 2024 ...
[Left (enlarge): Negative of the Shroud face, digitally processed[XFW]
Bill Lauto is an environ-mental scientist and energy consultant who has been following and studying the Shroud of Turin since he was 14 ... "So I was a 14-year-old going into the field of science and questioning the possibility that there was no such thing as a God. I looked up Jesus Christ in the Encyclopedia Britannica, saw that photograph, and from there, it all started for me". He attests that studying the Shroud gave him faith like never before, as it is also based on reason. "Now when people come up to me and say ‘Bill you're a scientist, you don't believe in all that God stuff ...` I say, 'You're right, I don't believe, I know.'" ... [This is similar to my experience. I came from a non-Christian home and was converted to Christianity from Atheism/Deism at age 20. So as an adult convert to Christianity, with no childhood faith, I always have `tested everything and held fast to what is good' (1Th 5:21). My Christian faith was, and is, based on reason, but the Shroud has added a new dimension to it. I wrote somewhere, it may have been in a comment, that, "I am now like the Apostle John in the empty tomb in Jn 20:6-9, who found "the binding strips looped together and knotted exactly as they had bound the hands and the feet" but Jesus' body was no longer inside them:
"From his account of the finding of the cloths on Easter morning it is fairly obvious that something in the arrangement of both the sweat cloth and the binding strips assures him [John] that the body could not possibly have been stolen, but that Christ had risen from the dead. The simplest clue to this startling information would have been to find these cloths each in its proper place: the binding strips looped together and knotted exactly as they had bound the hands and the feet; the sweat cloth "not together with the binding strips" but "in a place by itself" ... still "folded together" lengthwise, and perhaps knotted at the top. In the state of glory, the risen body has no need of first untying knots"[BW57, 99].So, from what I now know about the Shroud, I know that Jesus has risen from the dead!]
"Atheist who tried to prove Shroud of Turin was fake becomes Christian after alarming evidence," Daily Mirror, 21 August 2024, Bradley Jolly ... Filmmaker David Rolfe was a self-professed atheist
[Right (enlarge): British filmmaker David Rolfe has been documenting the Shroud of Turin since 1978, capturing decades of scientific research aimed at proving the linen's authenticity.]
when he set out to make a documentary about one of the most revered religious artifacts in history - the Shroud of Turin. With the 1978 movie, [The Silent Witness] the photography expert set out to find a prosaic explanation as to how a blood-soaked imprint of a man matching Jesus Christ's description manifested onto the cloth relic. Instead, he was so convinced of its authenticity he converted to Christianity and has since made several documentaries and published books on the shroud. 'I started off as an atheist, and then became an agnostic. And I'm now a Christian, because I cannot possibly understand anything else that could have produced that image,' said Rolfe. The 14-foot-long shroud features a faint, brownish image of a five-foot, six-inch [sic 1.81 m (5 ft 11 in.) WI98, 25] tall man with sunken eyes, wounds on various parts of his body that match the injuries suffered during Jesus' crucifixion. Rolfe, from England in the UK, has put up a $1 million prize for anyone who can recreate the shroud's image of a crucified man without showing traces of ink, paint or other agents. [A fatal problem of the forgery theory: the Shroudman's image is not painted[11Jul16], but it would have been if the Shroud was a medieval forgery. And Bishop d'Arcis was wrong that the Shroud was "cunningly painted"[03Jul18]]. He recently launched a contest in the US, calling on Americans to recreate a photographic negative image of 'a crucified man' on a 14-foot-by-three-foot piece of linen. ... Rolfe has offered the British Museum - which was involved in what he called that 'flawed' analysis - $1 million to reproduce the shroud with its famous imprint. 'They haven't attempted, not even for a million dollars,' he said. 'I am convinced [the Shroud of Turin] is authentic, I personally have no doubt,' said Rolfe who recently released a new documentary called 'Who Can He Be?' Last year, backed by his film company, Rolfe opened up the $1m prize to anyone who could reproduce the shroud with all of its 'characteristics.' By 'characteristics' he means the imprint of the wounded man. For some believers, including Rolfe, the outline Jesus' body was miraculously imprinted onto the fabric when he was resurrected over 2,000 years ago. The shroud also does not show signs of ink or dye that would suggested it was a fake - no visible trace of any paint, ink, dye, stain or pigments. 'Contestants must match both the pattern of bloodstains seen on the Shroud of Turin, and the composition of blood, including hemoglobin, bilirubin, immunoglobulin, and albumin,' according to the rules of the challenge.[This is another fatal problem of the forgery theory: the Shroudman's blood is real, human blood[03Jun17], but no artist ever depicted blood with real, human blood. Nor do those who falsely claim to have replicated the Shroud!] 'In addition, the largest blood stains should exhibit surrounding areas of ultraviolet fluorescence as noted on the Shroud. [This is enough, but Rolfe could have included the at least 100 tiny scourge marks, some of which are only visible under ultraviolet light (discovered in 1801), which also "exhibit surrounding areas of ultraviolet fluorescence"] 'When light and shade are reversed,
[Left (enlarge): Full-length positive double image of the man on the Shroud after the 2002 restoration[10Jul24]. This positive is a photographic negative in that if a photograph is taken of it with an old-fashioned film camera, the negative of that film will be life-like! It is hard enough for an artist to depict a full-length, double image (head to head, front and back), naked man. It is impossible for an artist to do it such that the positive is a photographic negative (artists have tried). Let alone containing three-dimens-ional information[05Feb17], being non-directional[29Oct16], and extremely superficial [11Nov16]! And modern artists know about photographic negativity and have the Shroud to copy. But a medieval forger woud have no concept of photographic negativity (it was discovered in the 1820s) and he didn't have the Shroud to copy!]
as in a photographic negative, the image must appear as a realistic and anatomically accurate representation of a body.' [That the Shroudman's image is a photographic negative[22Dec16] is yet another fatal problem of the forgery theory. Rolfe's US$1M is safe!] Rolfe told DailyMail.com that no one in his native Britain had claimed the prize. 'No one has come forward either from America to claim it,' he added. 'Once they realize what the actual image characteristics are on the cloth, they quickly realize that they can't reproduce it.'[Where are those Shroud sceptics who claim to have replicated the Shroud (e.g. Luigi Garlaschelli)? If they don't claim the prize, then their followers will know they were lying. From now no Shroud sceptic will claim to have replicated the Shroud, because they would have to claim Rolfe's US$1M and they would suffer the embarrassment of failing to meet Rolfe's criteria, which are minimal. In my book, chapter 17 "How was the image formed?" I evaluate claimed replications of the Shroud according to:
"Major features Any explanation of how the Shroudman's image was formed must explain all the Shroud's major features .... Claimed replications of the Shroud which do not include each and every major feature of the Shroud, are a type of `straw man' fallacy. That is, they present a claimed replication of the Shroud which does not fully replicate it, and then falsely claim that they have replicated the Shroud! Major features of the Shroud include: 1. Double body image; 2. Negative; 3. Three-dimensional; 4. Superficial; 5. Non-directional; 6. Uniform colour; 7. Faint; 8. No added colour (paint, etc); 9. Blood is real and human, 10. Blood was on the cloth before the image; and 11. X-rays of hands, teeth, skull, etc" (references omitted.].
"Shroud of Turin dates from time of Christ, scientists reveal," Catholic Herald, Simon Caldwell, 22 August 2024 ... Italian researchers have used a new X-ray technique to demonstrate that the Shroud of Turin dates from the time of Jesus Christ. Scientists at the Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, CNR) studied eight tiny samples of fabric from the
[Above (enlarge): Microscope photographs of the shroud sample (Heritage).]
shroud, a burial garment which bears the imprint of a man killed by crucifixion, using a method called wide-angle X-ray scattering (WAXS).
[Above (enlarge): Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) curves. The green "2000 years" curve is from a linen sample recovered from the Jewish fortress Masada which was conquered by the Romans in AD 74 and and thereafter occupied only between the 5th and 7th centuries by the Byzantine monastery of Marda[25Aug24]. The orange curve is from a Shroud sample. As can be seen, the Shroud sample's WAXS curve very closely matches that of the 1st century Masada sample! See 22May22; 09Sep23; 16Aug22; 11May24 & 25Aug24]
They were able to age flax cellulose – long chains of sugar molecules which slowly deteriorate over time – to show that the shroud is 2,000 years old, based on the conditions it was kept in. They deduced that the shroud was kept in conditions maintaining a temperature around 22.5 degrees Celsius and a relative humidity of about 55 per cent for 13 centuries before it was brought to Chambery, France, in the 1350s; thereby taking the shroud's chronology all the way back to the time of Christ. [The Shroud's temperature and humidity assumptions are corroborated by the Masada result. The Shroud's "2,000 years old" age is corroborated by that Masada sample's age, and four other scientific tests of the Shroud's age: Vanillin content: "between 1300- and 3000-years old" - a range of ~146BC ± 850 years; Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR): "300 BC ±400 years", i.e. 700 BC - AD 100; Raman spectroscopy: "200 BC ± 500 years"[i.e. 700 BC - AD 300; Mechanical: "AD 400 ± 400 years", i.e. AD 1 - 800[25Aug24]. So now five scientific tests of the Shroud are consistent with the death of Jesus in AD 30[FJ64, 296, 300; DK15]. But since STURP found that the Shroudman's image was not painted, which even Joe Nickell (1944-) has admitted, and therefore Bishop d'Arcis' "cunningly painted" claim must be wrong[11Jul16], the 1988 radiocarbon dating claim that "the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval ... AD 1260-1390"[DP89, 611], is not corroborated by anything! Or worse, the Shroud's 1325 ±65 radiocarbon date is corroborated by a falsehood!] ... "The data profiles were fully compatible with analogous measurements obtained on a linen sample whose dating, according to historical records, is 55-74 AD, found at Masada, Israel," said the study in the journal Heritage. The samples were also compared with similar linens from the 13th and 14th centuries but none was a match. Dr Liberato De Caro, one of the scientists involved in the study, dismissed a 1988 test which concluded that the shroud was probably a Medieval forgery and only seven centuries old as inaccurate ... "To make the present result compatible with that of the 1988 radiocarbon test, the Shroud of Turn should have been conserved during its hypothetical seven centuries of life at a secular room temperature very close to the maximum values registered on the earth" ...! [This is a refutation of the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date of the Shroud, by a recognised scientific test, Wide-angle X-ray scattering (WAXS), in a peer-reviewed scientific journal! The surviving authors of the 1989 Nature article must either: 1) show where De Caro, et al.'s experiment is wrong; or 2) retract the Nature article! For some reason this 2022 WAXS experiment belatedly caught the attention of the media in August 2024, including Newsweek, The Independent and Al Jazeera! Read "Shroud of Turin discovery catches attention of world's media," Aleteia, 27 August 2024. Are we entering a second "Golden Age of the Shroud" after the first from the 1960s to 1988?]"'Face of Jesus' unveiled by AI using Shroud of Turin after astonishing discovery," Daily Express, 22 August 2024, Michael Moran ... Artificial intelligence has recreated the "face of Jesus Christ" from a piece of cloth some believe was used to wrap him after his Crucifixion ... The Daily Express used cutting-edge AI imager Midjourney to create a simulation of the face behind the shroud. The images appear to show 
[Left (enlarge): "An AI visualisation of what Jesus would look like according to AI (Image: Midjourney)."]
Christ with long flowing hair and a beard – much like many classical depictions of him. There appears to be cuts and grazes around his face and body, pointing to the fact he had just been killed ...
"Is that really what Jesus looked like? Experts weigh in on sensational AI image," Angelus News, 23 August 2024, Pablo Kay ... The image became an overnight social media sensation: a hauntingly lifelike rendering of the face of Jesus Christ claiming to be based off the Shroud of Turin using the latest in artificial intelligence technology. The image was generated by British tabloid "The Daily Express" using popular generative AI tool Midjourney as part of a story on new evidence that the Shroud, which many Catholics believe was the burial cloth of Jesus, dates back 2,000 years ago to the time of Christ. Perhaps most striking is that the new image supposedly drawn from the Shroud resembles classical depictions of Jesus from Christian art ... But how faithful is the image to the imprint on the Shroud? Not very, according to Catholic experts on AI interviewed by Angelus. "I don't think it's very scientifically accurate whatsoever," said Matthew Sanders, founder and CEO of Catholic web developer Longbeard. Because the tool involved, Midjourney, is trained on a vast collection of images from the internet and its own database, its rendition of Christ "is remarkably similar to other depictions of Jesus, and that's no accident," said Sanders, whose company has launched multiple Catholic-themed AI tools. Still, Sanders says he found the Daily Express' image "compelling" because it "conforms to many stereotypical archetypes of Jesus that we've seen" and because of how it depicted Christ's injuries and other details from the Shroud. "I don't want to diminish it, but I wouldn't put a lot of stock in what you're seeing here," said Sanders ... AI researcher Joseph Vukov agreed that the image's resemblance to popular depictions of Jesus is "not particularly surprising, because no doubt a lot of those images are part of what [Midjourney] was trained on." Vukov, a Catholic who teaches philosophy at Loyola University in Chicago ... sees a lot of promise in generative AI tools like Midjourney. But AI, he believes, isn't the ideal technology to create a scientifically faithful rendering of Christ's face. "Once you add AI to the mix, then you get all these training images in the mix as well," said Vukov ... "It's one of these cases where I think the more tech actually isn't doing anything better, it's probably doing something worse." ... Brian Patrick Green, who teaches AI ethics at Santa Clara University, stressed that generative AI tools "are designed to be creative, they're designed to embellish things" and that there's reason to be skeptical of such renderings. Moreover, tools like Midjourney allow users to choose from multiple versions of the image. "Whoever generated it could have gone through dozens of iterations of the image before they decided this one was the best one," said Green. "Every time you generate an image with generative AI, it throws in different little random tweaks to the image. And when they finally got one that they thought looked good and it was publishable, then that's the one that we see here." ... [While some may be favourably impressed by this AI depiction of Jesus, I am not. All that this AI program does (and it is admittedly clever programming), is search the Internet for depictions of Jesus based on the Shroud and combine them into one Shroud-like image. I cannot understand why some prefer to have this, the equivalent of an artist's painting of Jesus, when they can actually have a photograph of Jesus at the instant of his resurrection (a "`snapshot'
[Above: "Shroud of Turin Face Detail," AllPosters.com]
of the resurrection"[WI79, 251; WI98, 233-234]), which this above Shroud face photograph is, over my computer desk as I type!]
"Another Shroud of Turin study released: bloodstains consistent with crucifixion of Christ," The Catholic Herald, 28 August 2024 ... A new study has analysed the blood stains on the Shroud of Turin and found them to be consistent with Jesus's experience before and during His crucifixion and with the subsequent removal of His body for burial. Conducted by Giulio Fanti, a professor of mechanical and thermal measurements at the University of Padua, and a veteran researcher into the Shroud of Turin, the July report argues that "macroscopic and microscopic" analyses of the bloodstains reflect the physical conditions 
[Above: "Photo: Graphic from the report showing the three principal directions of the blood pattern that were detected in correspondence with the side wound on the right side of the body; image on the left represents the side wound on a life-size model; screenshot from report PDF. experienced by a man being tortured before and during a crucifixion and then moved for burial."]
"All of these results are consistent with the description of Jesus Christ in the Holy Bible and, in particular, within the four Canonical Gospels," the study concludes. The "macroscopic" analysis involved investigating the directions of blood flow and the final position of the blood stains on the shroud, which is imprinted with the body and face of a man wearing a crown of thorns and is covered in bloodstains. The report highlights: "the single rivulets show a sudden change of their direction; it is probable that the blood flows streamed when the corpse was moved." At the "microscopic level" the study analysed and found three different types of blood consistent with the state of a body before death, when experiencing torture and then after death. The study also found the blood stains appear to reflect scourge marks that are consistent with the scourging of Christ at the pillar before the crucifixion, while the quantity of blood matches the amount of blood that would have resulted from the wounds described in the Gospels. The study notes nanoparticles such as creatine – a naturally occurring substance in the body that is linked to stress – which were found in the blood and are consistent with "the very heavy torture suffered by Jesus" and "intense flagellation". It also detected evidence showing the occurrence of "microcytic anemia", a condition that is consistent with the "extreme difficulties" Jesus would have had in "exchanging oxygen" during "extremely laboured breathing". As a result, the study explains: "Jesus had to heavily increase his breathing and, consequently, increase the frequency of his heartbeats, which prompted a heart attack as the main cause of his death."[Clearly this level of physiological detail is far beyond what a medieval forger could imagine, let alone depict! I wonder when Shroud sceptics Steven Schafersman (1948-) and Joe Nickell (1944-) are going to `throw in the towel' and admit that, since the Shroud is not "a product of human artifice," then " the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ":
"As the (red ochre) dust settles briefly over Sindondom, it becomes clear there are only two choices: Either the shroud is authentic (naturally or supernaturally produced by the body of Jesus) or it is a product of human artifice[NJ87, 141]. Asks Steven Schafersman: `Is there a possible third hypothesis? No, and here's why. Both Wilson[WI79, 51-53] and Stevenson and Habermas[, 121-129] go to great lengths to demonstrate that the man imaged on the shroud must be Jesus Christ and not someone else. After all, the man on this shroud was flogged, crucified, wore a crown of thorns, did not have his legs broken, was nailed to the cross, had his side pierced, and so on. Stevenson and Habermas[Ibid, 128] even calculate the odds as 1 in 83 million that the man on the shroud is not Jesus Christ (and they consider this a very conservative estimate). I agree with them on all of this. If the shroud is authentic, the image is that of Jesus'" (my emphasis except "this" is original)[SS82, 42].]
"Little-known study of Shroud of Turin supports theory it was used to wrap the body of Jesus," Daily Mail, Ellyn Lapointe, 30 August 2024 ... As calls for a re-analysis of the Shroud of Turin mount, more research claims to support the theory it may have actually been the very cloth Jesus was buried in. A study quietly published by researchers in Italy saw the team digitally restore parts of the body depicted on the fabric's imprint, revealing never-before-seen details. They found the right-hand thumb in an unnatural position, indicating that the hand was
[Above (enlarge[DG17, 143]): A 2017 study digitally restored the hands region of the Turin Shroud imprint, revealing the unnatural position of the right hand's thumb that may have been caused by crucifixion. Note the tip of the thumb almost completely hidden by the index finger.]
likely in a 'stressed' position that may have resulted from nerve damage caused by crucifixion. They say their findings suggest 'important indirect proof that the Turin Shroud wrapped the body of a man who was crucified alive.' ... The little-known Italian study was published in 2017 in the Journal of Cultural Heritage but was not publicized at the time. The research team from the Institute of Crystallography performed an 'intensity histogram transform' - a type of digital analysis that improves the quality of an image - to restore and analyze the hands region of the Shroud's imprint. This brought new anatomical details into focus, [Including the man's scrotum (below)!] and revealed that
[Above (enlarge[DG17, 142]): Enhanced image of the man's scrotum under his hands (the blue line is part of the larger image in the journal.). A medieval forger certainly would not have depicted Jesus' scrotum, especially when it takes advanced 21st century computer software to bring it into focus!]
the right hand's thumb was in an 'unnatural' position, lying adjacent to the palm of the hand but positioned below it. Consequently, the thumb is almost completely missing from the imprint except for its protruding end. This is important because scientists consider the absence of the thumbs to be one of the main indirect proofs that the Shroud was used to wrap the body of a man who was crucified alive, the researchers stated in their report. That's because crucifixion would have caused injury to the hands' median nerves, forcing the thumbs into this an unnatural, hidden position. But crucifixion isn't the only possible explanation for the missing thumbs ... Other experts believe that the thumbs are not visible in the imprint simply because their natural position is in front of and slightly to the side of the index finger, which would create more distance between the thumbs and the Shroud. [For my right (and left) hand it is impossible to make my thumb rest under my hand with only the tip showing. The outer edge of my entire thumb is always visible. ] That would mean that the imprint could have been made by a body lying in a relaxed, supine position - no crucifixion necessary. But based on their analysis, the study authors state that the thumb does not appear to be in its natural position. Rather, it appears in a non-relaxed inside the palm of the hand and almost fully hidden by the index finger except for its end - strong evidence for injuries consistent with crucifixion. [This was medical examiner Dr Frederick Zugibe (1928-2013) theory:
"... Zugibe believes that the thumbs are not visible on the TS image because their natural position, both for death and living persons, is in front of and slightly to the side of the index finger, at a larger distance from the linen cloth with respect to other fingers. Zugibe, thus, disagrees with the con- clusions of Barbet and Bucklin that the absence of thumbs' images is due to the position of these fingers inside the hand's palms due to injury of the median nerves ... Moreover, we can also conclude that our results, about the visibility of a part of the right hand's thumb in the restored TS image, rule out definitively the Zugibe's hypothesis that, in a relaxed supine body of a crucified man, the thumbs are located in a lower plane with respect to the other fingers, in front of and slightly to the side of the index finger, and that are not visible because they are not in contact with the overlaying cloth."[DG17, 141, 143-144]When Chief Surgeon Dr Pierre Barbet(1884–1961) discovered that the thumbs of the Shroudman are not visible because a crucifixion nail in the wrist damages the hand's median nerve, which causes the thumb of that hand to retract into its palm, he asked, "Could a forger have imagined this?":
"Now, dissections have revealed to me that the trunk of the median nerve is always seriously injured by the nail; it is divided into sections, being broken sometimes halfway and sometimes two-thirds of the way across, according to the case. And the motor nerves of the oponens muscles and of the short flexor muscle of the thumb branches at this level off the median nerve. The contraction of these thenar muscles, which were still living like their motor nerve, could be easily explained by the mechanical stimulation of the median nerve. Christ must then have agonised and died and have become fixed in the cadaverous rigidity, with the thumbs bent inwards into His palms. And that is why, on the shroud, the two hands when seen from behind only show four fingers, and why the two thumbs are hidden in the palms. Could a forger have imagined this?" (emphases Barbet's)[BP53, 118-119]And the answer clearly is NO!]
"Turin Shroud expert says 'face of Jesus is real' after noticing Bible passage," Daily Mirror, Michael Moran, 26 Sep 2024 ... The Shroud of Turin, which many believe was the burial cloth used to cover Jesus Christ, has been the subject of much controversy for centuries - but one expert thinks the Bible holds the answer ... Russ Breault, a long-time
[Right (original): Russ Breault has studied the Shroud's history for many years.]
Shroud researcher and author, believes there are still unanswered questions about how the relic came to be. ... he said: "The image is so superficial as to penetrate only the top one to two microfibres of the cloth-or about 1% of a single thread." ... He added that while blood has penetrated the fabric, something else caused the flax fibres to rapidly dehydrate and oxidise, leading to discolouration only around the body areas. Breault dismissed the idea that a simple burn could result in such a precise scorch mark. Instead, he referred to the Bible, suggesting a supernatural burst of energy during the resurrection, which he claims has been replicated in laboratory conditions. "While there were multiple post-resurrection appearances of Jesus, there were no eyewitnesses to the resurrection event itself," he said. "Yet there are biblical references to Jesus appearing as a being of light to Peter, James and John on the Mount of Transfiguration [Mt 17:1-8; Mk 9:2-9; Lk
[Above (enlarge[FLW, 142]): Transfiguration by Alexandr Ivanov, 1824]
9:28-36], and his appearance to Saul (who becomes Paul) as brilliant flash of light blinding him for three days[Acts 9:1-7; 22:6-9; 26:12-15]. Both would seem to indicate an intense burst of light at the point of resurrection." [I agree with this! I have long argued that the man's image on the Shroud was caused by a burst of intense light from Jesus' resurrecting body and the Transfiguration of Jesus was a preview of Jesus' resurrected body[05Sep16; 22Dec16; 05Feb17; 07Mar19; 28Mar20; 08Dec22; 09Sep23; 11May24 & 02Jul24].] Russ highlighted research carried out by Italian Physicist, Paolo Di Lazzaro, who utilised 
[Left (enlarge): Physicist Paolo Di Lazzaro managed to recreate the enigmatic image using a high-powered laser powered laser (Image: ResearchGate).]
high power lasers to mimic the extreme superficial nature of the image along with the same colouration using a 40 nano-second burst from an ultraviolet laser against a control sample of linen. [Indeed!:
"`The double image (front and back) of a scourged and crucified man, barely visible on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin, has many physical and chemical characteristics that are so particular that the staining ... is impossible to obtain in a laboratory,' concluded experts from Italy's National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development [ENEA]. The scientists set out to `identify the physical and chemical processes capable of generating a colour similar to that of the image on the Shroud.' They concluded that the exact shade, texture and depth of the imprints on the cloth could only be produced with the aid of ultraviolet lasers – technology that was clearly not available in medieval times. The scientists used extremely brief pulses of ultraviolet light to replicate the kind of marks found on the burial cloth. They concluded that the iconic image of the bearded man must therefore have been created by `some form of electromagnetic energy (such as a flash of light at short wavelength).' Although they stopped short of offering a non-scientific explanation for the phenomenon, their findings will be embraced by those who believe that the marks on the shroud were miraculously created at the moment of Christ's Resurrection" (my emphasis)[SN11]. See 22Dec11a]"This was the first time any aspect of the Shroud image has been duplicated using light," Russ added. He is of the belief that, at the moment of Christ's resurrection, a massive energy surge akin in effect to a modern high-powered laser surged through his body. [This is supported by what ENEA found, that to replicate on a sheet of linen a man's double image, the exact same size, colour and depth as the Shroud image, instantaneously, would require a battery of excimer (vacuum ultraviolet) lasers with a total power output of "34 thousand billion watts"!:
"However, ENEA scientists warn, `it should be noted that the total power of VUV radiations required to instantly color the surface of linen that corresponds to a human of average height, body surface area equal to = 2000 MW/cm2 17000 cm2= 34 thousand billion watts makes it impractical today to reproduce the entire Shroud image using a single laser excimer, since this power cannot be produced by any VUV light source built to date (the most powerful available on the market come to several billion watts )'"[TM11]. See 22Dec11b]Backing his theory is the fact that the bloodstains on the Shroud appear to have been formed before the image of the body. This could suggest that the cloth was wrapped around a mortally wounded body prior to the image being formed. He went on: "There is no image under the blood, which means the blood must have been on the cloth first, followed by the image. This makes sense if the Shroud is authentic ... Good Friday followed by Easter Sunday. But it makes no sense as the work of an artist, in fact, it would be impossible." [See my "No image under blood #25" Biophysicist Dr John Heller (1921-95) described how he and blood chemist Alan D. Adler (1931-2000) discovered, unexpectedly, that there was no image under the Shroudman's blood:
"If an artist had painted the Shroud, the blood must have been put on after the images. We decided to check that point. We took some blood - and serum-covered fibrils from a body image area. If the images were there before the blood, and if we removed the blood, we could expect to see straw-yellow image fibers. We prepared a mixture of enzymes that digest blood and its proteins. When all the blood and protein were gone, the underlying fibrils were not straw-yellow; they were ordinary background fibrils. This was strong evidence that the blood had gone on before the images. It suggested that blood had protected the linen from the image-making process. Surely this was a weird way to paint a picture"[HJ83, 203].All attempts to replicate the Shroud add the blood after the image. For example, Prof. Luigi Garlashelli (1949-):
"Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages. They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A mask was used for the face. The pigment was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries. They then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect" (my emphasis)[PP09].
[Left (enlarge): Positive of the frontal half of Garlashelli's claimed "Life-size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and its Image."[GL10]. Garlashelli's paper is full of plausible-sounding half-truths and outright falsehoods! He simply ignores that the blood on the Shroud is real, human, blood (see below) and instead he used "a very diluted suspension of red ochre, cinnabar and alizarin in water" which "was gently applied with a small brush" (p.8)! Garlashelli admitted that he could not replicate the man's head "because of ... geometrical wrap-around distortions." So, a "suitable bas-relief was therefore anufactured by using plaster of Paris" (p.7). But, despite relying on Walter McCrone (1916-2002) extensively, Garliashelli ignores McCrone's major point, "Why [would a medieval forger] go to all the work of preparing a statue or bas-relief" when "painting a dilute watercolor image on a canvas ... is a common sense assumption":
"I realize that there are still, perhaps, a majority of people convinced by the carbon-dating that the `Shroud' is medieval, who are still looking for an answer as to how the `Shroud' was produced. Many mechanisms have already been proposed. Some say it was draped wet over a bas-relief to which it was shaped then dabbed with powder or a paint. Some say a painting was prepared and transferred to a cloth in contact with it by pressure. However, I see no reason to doubt that an artist like Simone Martini [1284-1344] simply took up his brush and a dilute red ochre watercolor paint based on scraps of parchment as the vehicle and proceeded to paint the `Shroud.' Why go to all the work of preparing a statue or bas-relief or making a transfer of the image from a primary artist's rendering? A direct approach to painting a dilute watercolor image on a canvas of the proper size is a common sense assumption; Occam's Razor applies here ..."[MW99, 122]. Note that McCrone does not say who was this "artist like Simone Martini"!]In fact I had mentioned Garlashelli earlier in this post in the context of David Rolfe's US$1M offer to anyone who can replicate the Shroud, but he has had no offers, including from Garlashelli. So Garlashelli must realise at some level that his claim to have replicated the Shroud was a lie and not just delusional! See also above that in my book, "Claimed replications of the Shroud which do not include each and every major feature of the Shroud, are a type of `straw man' fallacy, in that, "they present a claimed replication of the Shroud which does not fully replicate it, and then falsely claim that they have replicated the Shroud!]
According to Russ, closer inspection of the bloodstains on the relic only raises further questions about the possibility that it was faked. He remarked: "To complicate matters for our elusive medieval artist is that the blood has been determined to be type AB human blood, but not whole blood as if painted onto the cloth with a brush, but rather the exudate from actual wounds showing a high content of bilirubin, a breakdown byproduct of red blood cells that occurs during conditions of extreme physical stress ... crucifixion perhaps? [Garlashelli just ignored this. In his paper he makes a pretence of scientific honesty, but that's all it is - a pretence. His Shroud sceptic readers will no doubt be convinced by it. So Garlashelli is yet another Shroud sceptic example of `the blind leading the blind' (Mt 15:14; Lk 6:39):
[Above (enlarge)[FPB]: "The Blind Leading the Blind," 1568, by Pieter Bruegel the Elder (c.1525-1569)].]
Notes:
1. This post is copyright. I grant permission to extract or quote from any part of it (but not the whole post), provided the extract or quote includes a reference citing my name, its title, its date, and a hyperlink back to this page. [return]
Bibliography
BP53. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," [1950], Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963.
FPB. "File:Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1568) The Blind Leading the Blind.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 22 June 2024.
BW57. Bulst, W., 1957, "The Shroud of Turin," McKenna, S. & Galvin, J.J., transl., Bruce Publishing Co: Milwaukee WI.
DG17. De Caro, L. & Giannini, C., 2017, "Turin Shroud hands' region analysis reveals the scrotum and a part of the right thumb," Journal of Cultural Heritage, Vol. 24, March - April, 16 March, 140-146.
DK15. Doig, K.F., 2015, "New Testament Chronology: "The 30 CE Crucifixion."
DL22. De Caro, L., et al., 2022, "X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud's Linen Sample," Heritage, Vol. 5, No. 2, 11 April.
DP89. Damon, P.E., et al., 1989, "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, 611-615.
FJ64. 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.
FLW. "File:Alexandr Ivanov 015.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 15 October 2024.
GL10. Garlaschelli, L., 2010, "Life-size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and its Image," Journal of Imaging Science and Technology, 54(4).
HJ83. Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA.
MW99. McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Amherst NY.
NJ87. Nickell, J., 1987, "Inquest on the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Buffalo NY, Revised, Reprinted, 2000.
SH81. Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., 1981, "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI.
PP09. Pullella, P., "Italian scientist reproduces Shroud of Turin," Reuters, 5 October.
SN11. Squires, N., 2011, "Italian study claims Turin Shroud is Christ's authentic burial robe," The Telegraph, 19 December.
SS82. Schafersman, S.D., 1982, "Science, the public, and the Shroud of Turin," The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 6, No. 3, Spring, 37-56.
TM11. Tosatti, M., 2011, "The Shroud is not a fake," The Vatican Insider, 12 December.
WI79. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ?," [1978], Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition.
WI98. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY.
XFW. "Extract from File:Turin shroud positive and negative displaying original color information 708 x 465 pixels 94 KB.jpg," Wikimedia Commons, 7 July 2021.
Posted 25 October 2024. Updated 7 November 2024.
Posts
_The_Blind_Leading_the_Blind.jpg){kind=link}
