Something just popped into my head as I was looking at the site - what if the shroud was a decorated piece of cloth prepared in anticipation of using it as some high ranking person's burial cloth?
Okay, if you don't want to stop people from seeing it, or making their own choices, but you do want to stop people from being sold a pup, what action might you take?
If the town shouldn't comercially benefit from it's visitors, should that be the same for the Olympics, other sporting, or entertainment events, or conferences, or sight-seeing?
As I understand it, there's no charge to see the Turin Shroud, just that the viewings are booked, presumably for health and safety reasons. There have been stampedes and deaths on other pilgrimages, as I understand it.
It would be interesting to know if there's a booking fee, mind.
Thanks for the video Ken, but I was hoping for a bit more.
In the documentary I watched, they had the fella who invented carbon dating. It seems the fibres had a residue on them due to bacterial contamination. This wasn't known about at the time when it was tested and the cleaning processes used at the time were ineffective against it. I think that means they carbon dated the residue, not the shroud fibres.
He basically said work was being done to find a way of removing the residue and when that had been sorted, they'd offer to test the shroud fibres again...but he couldn't say if the offer would be accepted.
I'm struggling to find an unbiased, or up to date documentary. Any links would be gratefully received.
It has occurred to me that this is an important subject to you, Zee. Why create a blog about it if it didn't have some kind of impact, or emotional investment for you?
I also wonder if total rejection, even to the point of denying that it's an interesting piece of art, or history strikes me as fanatical as those who start talking about black holes and resurrection phenomena in relation to the Turin Shroud.
The Mona Lisa is a stain, just a very well arranged one.
I've just watched an interesting documentary, albeit a probably biased one.
The blood marks are actually blood on the shroud. The blood group (AB) matches the blood on a cloth in Spain that is supposed to be the one which covered Jesus' head after he was taken down from the cross. DNA testing would be interesting, eh? I wonder why that hasn't been done.
28 species of pollen found on the cloth correspond with plants only found in the Middle East, suggesting at some point the cloth has been there.
The image is a negative, like the negative of a photograph. The image has not been painted on the cloth because, unlike the blood stains, nothing has soaked into the cloth.
The image corresponds to common imagery of Jesus for centuries and it has been suggested that the image on the Turin Shroud might be the prototype for all the subsequent imagery.
The image on the cloth appears to replicate internal skeletal structure in places, suggesting it could have been formed by radiation, like an X-ray image.
The fibres of the cloth have been coated with some kind of bacterial residue which may have affected the carbon dating, ie. the bacterial contamination is from 700 years ago, but the cloth might be much older.
Even if it was shown to be about 2,000 years old, it doesn't prove it's the image of Jesus. Even if it could be proved it's Jesus, it doesn't prove that Jesus was the son of a god, or that a god exists.
I do find it interesting that it's at least 700 years old and the image doesn't appear to have been painted on. Don't you find that interesting?
Okay, let me rephrase that: What do you think my interest in seeing the Turin Shroud as a piece of artwork, or as a memory aid has to do with me being brainwashed?
Because it's fascinating and caused such a stir for so long? It's still a piece of art, isn't it?
Or because some still believe it's a relic and the scientific tests the work of the devil?
I remember all the fuss going on before it was shown to be not what it was claimed. To be fair, if you really believed it was a relic, to take a piece for testing created an issue of sacrilege.
I suppose one has to question whether it's about freeing people, or whether that's a cover for another agender.
I'm sure a lot of people who go into the armed services and to war, firmly believe they're protecting the innocent. I can't criticise that as my mother said they were overjoyed when the Americans arrived at the end of WWII. Brave men indeed, to whom I owe a debt of gratitude for my existance.
But I do wonder how many are duped into risking life and limb.
online today!jac_the_gripper Blog Comments (2,987)
RE: Ok what's this about then.
I checked out the official website for the Turin Shroud. You can book online for free, but calling by phone depends upon your network charges.It also describes the shroud and it all lollks, just like the pope's speech, very non-commital.
Something just popped into my head as I was looking at the site - what if the shroud was a decorated piece of cloth prepared in anticipation of using it as some high ranking person's burial cloth?