Thursday, January 24, 2013

False malware warning

I just now (9 February 2013) entered into Google Chrome and the false malware message no longer appears.

I have just been told that this blog gives the following malware warning (click to enlarge) to visitors using Google Chrome and the old address (i.e. without the ".au" suffix):

As I explained to the person who kindly warned me of the problem:

I have up-to-date virus protection, I am averaging 68 visits a day, including 17 in the last hour, and no one else has told me my page is infected. I can look at the HTML source code and there is nothing that I haven't written. So I assume ... has received a false positive virus message.

But on further checking I found that when I entered the old (without the ".au" suffix) address into Google Chrome only, I too received the above warning. It does not appear in Internet Explorer or Firefox even when I use the old address. And it does not appear in Google Chrome, Internet Explorer or Firefox when I use the new ".au" suffix address:

So I assume it is a false positive malware message. But because it will deter visitors using Google Chrome and the old address accessing this blog, I have sent the following feedback to Blogger Support:

Blogger Support

When my The Shroud of Turin blog is accessed via Google Chrome using its old address a malware message is displayed that my blog has been infected with malware inserted by www*sanfrancisco*sentinel*com ["."s replaced by "*"s]. The malware message does not appear in Google Chrome, Internet Explore or Mozilla Firefox when the when the new ".au" address is used. And it doesn't appear in Internet Explore or Mozilla Firefox when the when the old ".com" address is used. So it seems to be a particular problem of accessing my blog's old [address] using Google Chrome. Can you please investigate and fix the problem? Thanks.

Stephen E. Jones

PS: I haven't heard back from Blogger Support. But I have since thought of another reason why Google Chrome's warning message:

Content from www*sanfrancisco*sentinel*com, a known malware distributor, has been inserted into this web page. Visiting this page now is very likely to infect your computer with malware.
must be wrong. I have not edited this blog's template for many years, so a malware virus would have to be able to breach Blogger's security to infect it. This morning I looked at this blog's underlying template, which said it had not been updated since 2004, and a search on "sentinel" in it drew a blank. So again it sounds like a Google Chrome issue, and nothing to do with my blog.

PPS: By chance I found one of my blog posts had a reference to sanfrancisco*sentinel*com ["."s replaced by "*"s]. I have deleted that name in the hope that it was the name of that site that Google Chrome was reacting to.

Stephen E. Jones

Friday, January 11, 2013

The Shroud of Turin: 2.4. The wounds

Here, belatedly, is part 10, "2.4. The wounds" in my series, The Shroud of Turin My previous post in this series was part 9, "2.3. The man on the Shroud ." See the series' part 1, Contents for more information about this series.

© Stephen E. Jones

Wounds. The man on the Shroud has numerous wounds [1], to

[Above: The wounds, bloodstains and other marks on the Shroud of Turin[2]]

his head (front and back)[3] and his face[4]; his body (front and back)[5]; his arms[6] and hands[7]; and his legs[8] and feet[9].

As will be seen, both the wounds[10] and the bloodstains[11] have an anatomical[12], scientific[13] and historical [14] accuracy which was unknown in the 14th century[15], and therefore represent yet another major problem of the forgery theory[16, §3].

Head and face. The man's scalp, front and back[17], has numerous puncture wounds[18] which correspond to a crown, or rather cap, of thorns[19] being thrust over the top of the man's head[20]. These puncture wounds match those on the Sudarium of Oviedo[21 ] which has been in Spain since the seventh century[22]. This is evidence that the 13th-14th century radiocarbon date of the Shroud[23] is wrong[24] and is another major problem for the forgery theory[25, §4]. His face has been severely beaten[26] with a broken nose[27, 28], and swelling of both eyebrows, below his right eye, nose, left cheek, and left side of his chin [29].

Body. The man's shoulders have abrasions consistent with having carried a Roman crossbeam[30]. His chest and back have over a hundred small dumbbell shaped

[Left: A Roman flagrum from Herculaneum (modern Ercolano) near Pompeii[31]]

wounds[32] which correspond to the pieces of metal[33] attached to the three thongs of a Roman whip called a flagrum[34]. On his right side[35], just below his heart[36] there is a large wound which corresponds to a thrust of a Roman lance[37].

Arms and hands. The man has a wound at the wrist of his left hand consistent with a large nail having been driven through it[38]. Unlike traditional depictions of Christ with nails in the palms of his hands[39], the Shroud is scientifically[40] and historically[41] accurate because nails through ithe palms cannot support a man's body[42]. The man's left hand is crossed over his right[43] so any nail wound in his right hand cannot be seen[44].

Legs and feet. The man's knees have lacerations[45] consistent with the man having fallen to his knees on hard ground or paving[46]. The back of his calves and front of his thighs also have numerous dumbbell shaped wounds[47] from scourging with a Roman flagrum[48]. The right foot only is visible on the Shroud[49] and then only on the dorsal side[50]. It has a wound consistent with a large nail having been driven through it[51]. The left foot is not visible presumably because it was placed over the right foot[52], and the two feet affixed to the cross by a single nail[53]. Then rigor mortis would prevent the feet being laid out flat on the cloth[54].

Most of these wounds are accompanied with bloodstains[55] which will be considered separately in part 11, "2.4. The bloodstains." The wounds correspond with the Gospel's description the suffering and death of Jesus Christ[56] and will be further considered in "3. The Bible and the Shroud."

1. Wilson, I., 1979, "The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus?," Image Books: New York NY, Revised edition, p.21. [return]
2. Brooks, E.H., II., Miller, V.D. & Schwortz, B.M., 1981, "The Turin Shroud: Contemporary Insights to an Ancient Paradox," Worldwide Exhibition: Chicago IL, p.13. [return]
3. Wilson, I. & Miller, V., 1986, "The Evidence of the Shroud," Guild Publishing: London, pp.17,20.[return]
4. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.17. [return]
5. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.20. [return]
6. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.22. [return]
7. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.22-23. [return]
8. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.20. [return]
9. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.24. [return]
10. Wilson & Miller, 1986, pp.26,29. [return
11. Wilson & Miller, 1986, p.29. [return]
12. Wilson, 1979, p.32. [return]
13. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
14. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, pp.43-48)[return]
15.Wilson, 1998, p.9 [return]
16. Wilson, 1979, p.41. [return]
17. Wilson, 1979, pp.36-37. [return]
18. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
19. Wilson, 1979, p.37. [return]
20. Barbet, P., 1953, "A Doctor at Calvary," Earl of Wicklow, transl., Image Books: Garden City NY, Reprinted, 1963, pp.93-94. [return]
21 . Guscin, M., 1998, "The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, pp.30,32. [return]
22. Guscin, 1998, pp.13-17. [return]
23. Damon, P.E., et al., "Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, Vol. 337, 16 February, 1989, pp.611-615. [return]
24. Adler, A.D., 1998, "Concerning the Side Strip on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," Effatà Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, 2002, pp.89-90. [return]
25. Guscin, 1998, pp.84-87. [return]
26. Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.32. [return]
27. Zugibe, F.T., 1988, "The Cross and the Shroud: A Medical Enquiry into the Crucifixion," Paragon House: New York NY, Revised edition, p.28. [return]
28. That is, the nasal cartilage has separated from the bone (Heller, J.H., 1983, "Report on the Shroud of Turin," Houghton Mifflin Co: Boston MA, pp.2-3). [return]
29. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
30. Wilson, 1979, pp.38-39. [return]
31. Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., 2000, "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara Books: London, p.56. [return]
32. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
33. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
34. Wilson, 1979, pp.47-48. [return]
35. Wilson, 1979, p.30. [return]
36. Barbet, 1953, pp.137-138. [return]
37. Wilson, 1979, pp.48-49. [return]
38. Wilson, 1979, pp.40-41. [return]
39. Wilson, 1979, p.40. [return]
40. Wilson, 1979, pp.40-41. [return]
41. Wilson, 1998, pp.44-48. [return]
42. Wilson & Miller, 1986, pp.22-23. [return]
43. Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.165. [return]
44. Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996, p.165. [return]
45. Wilson, 1979, p.39. [return]
46. Wilson, 1998, p.33. [return]
47. Wilson, 1979, p.38. [return]
48. Wilson, 1986, p.20. [return]
49. Wilson, 1979, p.42. [return]
50. Wilson, 1979, p.22. [return]
51. Wilson, 1986, p.24. [return]
52. Wilson, 1979, pp.41-42. [return]
53. Wilson, 1979, p.42. [return]
54. Antonacci, 2000, p.32. [return]
55. Wilson, 1979, p.36. return]
56. Wilson, 1979, p.36. [return]
§3, §4. To be further examined under "9. Problems of the forgery theory". [return]

To be continued in part 11, "2.5. The bloodstains."

Last updated: 15 July, 2013.