tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post6531599629365720574..comments2024-03-14T08:08:39.968+08:00Comments on The Shroud of Turin: Shroud of Turin News - December 2015 Stephen E. Joneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-56135334190414922292016-01-10T14:21:25.287+08:002016-01-10T14:21:25.287+08:00Thanks for your reply and for the links. I am grat...Thanks for your reply and for the links. I am grateful.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-89584437578700778472016-01-10T13:48:18.635+08:002016-01-10T13:48:18.635+08:00Anonymous
>>"The retired biochemist a...Anonymous <br /><br />>>"The retired biochemist also worked in the 1990s for the Cardinals Conservation Commission for the Shroud of Turin, recommending encasing the fabric in argon gas to prevent further deterioration."<br /><br />>Do you know if the Vatican followed Dr. Adler's recommendation Mr. Jones ?<br /><br />Apparently. See my post, "<a href="http://goo.gl/5q1QoO" rel="nofollow">Locations of the Shroud: Turin 1918-Present: Turin Shroud Encyclopedia</a>," June 3, 2015: "<a href="http://goo.gl/NU0sbi" rel="nofollow">1998-2005 Turin Cathedral</a>" <br /><br />"For the 1998 exposition the Shroud was placed in a new <a href="http://www.shroud.it/NEWS98.HTM" rel="nofollow">temperature controlled, primarily argon gas filled, stainless steel and bulletproof glass conservation case, sponsored by the Italian company Italgas, that weighs three tons and measures ~4.6 x 1.4 m</a>. In it the Shroud can be stored flat and tilted ninety degrees when it is on public display." <br /><br />Stephen E. Jones<br />----------------------------------<br />MY POLICIES Comments are moderated. Those I consider off-topic, offensive or sub-standard will not appear. Except that comments under my latest post can be on any Shroud-related topic without being off-topic. I normally allow only one comment per individual under each one of my posts.Stephen E. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-37470221631882029632016-01-10T11:11:08.338+08:002016-01-10T11:11:08.338+08:00"The retired biochemist also worked in the 19..."The retired biochemist also worked in the 1990s for the Cardinals Conservation Commission for the Shroud of Turin, recommending encasing the fabric in argon gas to prevent further deterioration."<br /><br />Do you know if the Vatican followed Dr. Adler's recommendation Mr. Jones ? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-66745612936367824302016-01-07T23:11:45.582+08:002016-01-07T23:11:45.582+08:00Anonymous
>Not true. Dr. McCrone did see the S...Anonymous<br /><br />>Not true. Dr. McCrone did see the Shroud in Turin in 1978<br /><br />McCrone states that he was in Turin during the 1978 Shroud exhibition but he does not say that he saw the Shroud:<br /><br />"THE 1978 SHROUD EXHIBITION AND STUDY The four-week public exhibition of the Shroud in September 1978 ... was followed by a scientific meeting (October 7-8) and by five days of extensive testing by STURP. Ray Rogers was able to take a superb set of 32 tape samples ... Lucy [his wife] and I left Turin the day after the Shroud Exhibition and scientific meeting and on the day the STURP team started five full days of almost round-the-clock tests on the Shroud. We were very happy to be able to leave Turin for a vacation while still sure Ray would be able to get an excellent set of samples." (McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin," Prometheus Books: Amherst NY, pp.77-78)<br /><br />It is hard to believe that McCrone did not see the Shroud at that 1978 public exhibition, but it is equally hard to believe that he did see the Shroud then but did not mention it.<br /><br />It is interesting that Kersten & Gruber, who are very well informed, also state (p.33) that McCrone "had never seen the cloth himself."<br /><br />I would be interested in seeing a statement by McCrone himself that he did see the Shroud in 1978 or at any other Shroud exposition.<br /><br />But if McCrone did see the Shroud in 1978, it would have been just as any other member of the public, since he himself states above that he left Turin the day that STURP began their 5-day study of the Shroud.<br /><br />The reference [5] I cited says:<br /><br />"McCrone did not accompany the group to Italy, nor did he have, then or ever, physical contact with the Shroud." (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, p.89).<br /><br />So I have changed: "McCrone never saw the Shroud in person[5], let alone examined it directly" to: "McCrone never examined the Shroud itself directly[5]."<br /><br />Stephen E. Jones<br />---------------------------------<br />Reader, if you like this my <a href="http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com.au/" rel="nofollow">The Shroud of Turin </a> blog, and you have a website, could you please consider adding a hyperlink to my blog on it? This would help increase its <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank" rel="nofollow">Google PageRank</a> number and so enable those who are Google searching on "the Shroud of Turin" to more readily discover my blog. Thanks.Stephen E. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-2892304842603960622016-01-07T22:03:59.431+08:002016-01-07T22:03:59.431+08:00"McCrone never saw the Shroud in person"..."McCrone never saw the Shroud in person"<br /><br />Well, that not what they say on © 2016 McCrone Research Institute website<br /><br />http://mcri.org/v/65/the-reactions-to-mccrone%27s-shroud-research<br /><br />-------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />Kersten and Gruber in “The Jesus Conspiracy”: “McCrone claimed that iron in the marks [Shroud image] was a clear indication of an iron oxide pigment. This theory from a man who had never seen the cloth itself [Not true. Dr. McCrone did see the Shroud in Turin in 1978] was decisively refuted by further tests.”<br /><br />------------------------------------------------------------------------------Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-79638554999106038202016-01-07T07:53:24.673+08:002016-01-07T07:53:24.673+08:00Steve
>Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, t...Steve<br /><br />>Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, to you Stephen and to your wife. <br /><br />Thanks.<br /><br />>Thank you for having the best Shroud resource in the world.<br /><br />Thanks again, even if it is not true!<br /><br />Now that Dan Porter's blog has closed (his <a href="http://goo.gl/BH02Md" rel="nofollow">last post was on 15 December</a>, which I discovered only on 2 January-I will comment on this in this issue of <i>Shroud of Turin News</i>) my blog may get more readers. <br /><br />As far as I know, we were the only two Shroud blogs, although another `gossip column' blog may start up (run by <a href="http://goo.gl/VjeUVO" rel="nofollow">anti-authenticist Hugh Farey</a>?) to take its place. <br /><br />My style of blog, with its "normally ... only one comment per individual under each one of my posts" and not approving comments that are "off-topic, offensive or sub-standard" is diametrically opposite to what Porter's was, and so would not be what most of Porter's commenters want. His was really a discussion group, not a true blog (i.e. weblog), as this following 2004 quote shows:<br /><br />----------------------------------<br />"<a href="https://goo.gl/8YHu6i" rel="nofollow">What are the Differences Between Message Boards and Weblogs?</a> Posted by: leelefever on August 23, 2004... Responses Weblogs and Message Boards both allow for responses from the community- new topics can be responded-to by others. Weblog topics have comments and message board topics have replies. This subtle difference in syntax reveals a difference in the roles. <i>The word comment for weblogs</i> implies that the author <i>does not need further participation to reach a goal</i> - comment if you want. <i>Reply</i>, on the other hand, implies that <i>participation is explicitly requested</i> by the poster. A discussion is not a discussion without a reply.<br />----------------------------------<br /><br />I actually owned and moderated a Yahoo discussion group, Creation/Evolution/Design, but I was wasting too much time responding to `<a href="http://goo.gl/Z3tEJO" rel="nofollow">empty vessels which made the most noise</a>' so <a href="https://goo.gl/qXWv1z" rel="nofollow">I shut it down so that I could blog</a>. <br /><br />Stephen E. Jones<br />----------------------------------<br />MY POLICIES Comments are moderated. Those I consider off-topic, offensive or sub-standard will not appear. Except that comments under my latest post can be on any Shroud-related topic without being off-topic. I normally allow only one comment per individual under each one of my posts.Stephen E. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-50891331881382603382016-01-07T06:45:05.664+08:002016-01-07T06:45:05.664+08:00Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, to you Steph...Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, to you Stephen and to your wife. Thank you for having the best Shroud resource in the world.Ivanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08073646543319151044noreply@blogger.com