May we treat the Turin Shroud separately, please?

[chakka35]

The main theme of naomi's post below was diluted by digressions into the the subject of the Turin Shroud. May we discuss that separately?

The interesting thing about this cloth is you can cast doubt on its alleged mediaeval origins without involving Jesus at all. After all, even if it is the shroud of a crucified man, the Romans crucified countless thousands of people so we could never know which one this belonged to anyway.

There is nothing that can persuade me that the anatomically correct image on the Shroud could have been produced IN NEGATIVE a thousand years ago when it was discovered to be a negative only after photography was invented. The task is simply impossible as modern painters and researchers have shown. To leave no trace of any pigment or dye is another incomprehesible achievement. Also, the image can be properly discerned only from about 15 feet away. Very long paint-brushes?

Finally the last tests done are totallly invalid because there was no 'chain of custody' of the samples. The researchers did not cut them off themsleves but relied on the word of the Vatican officials that there were samples from the Shroud. This made the whole exercise nonsensical from the start and I am puzzled as to why anyone ever agreed to take part in.

Anyway, that's a start...

[naomi24]

I honestly can't see how anyone can - especially after watching that programme - but if they do, I'd be very interested in hearing their reasoning.

[ludwig]

It's about time they gave it a good wash.

[birdie1971]

jomifl - “... Does anyone have any compelling reason to believe that it is genuine?”

Yes! Apparently Khandro has tons and tons of evidence that shows it's genuine. But he's not willing to share it with us. It appears that he is restrained by a perpetual silence.

[naomi24]

If he watches that video, Khandro might have a re-think.

[RATTER15]

I just watched that video in its entirety, obviously there is nothing categoric but I think anybody with an open mind would readily accept that it is an amazing fake, deliberately created probably by the great Leonardo de Vinci and the face is most likely to be his own face.

[naomi24]

Has anyone seen Chakka around? It's unlike him to abandon his own thread. I do hope he's okay.

[mibn2cweus]

Chakka posted recently on an/other thread/s Naomi. http://www.theanswerb...2.html#answer-6769952

I suspect he got sidetracked and based on some of the topics in R&S lately I've been tempted to do some programming in BASIC myself. ;o)
http://www.theanswerb....uk/members/chakka35/

[naomi24]

Ha ha! Yes indeed.

Good work, Watson, old chap! Pleased Chakka is around. No doubt he'll be back here at sometime.