Peter Jennings v. The Shroud

  • Thread starter Thread starter philipmarus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

philipmarus

Guest
Did anyone see Peter Jenning tonight who did a report on the Shroud? He showed this guy called Wilson on how the Medieval forgery could have been done? My faith does not stand or fall by the Shroud. What bothered me is the way the report mentioned how the C-14 tests refuted the shroud but never mentioned the recent Chemist who has refuted the c-14 tests as having been contaminated. I think in interest of objectivity the Chemist should have at least been mentioned?
 
40.png
philipmarus:
Did anyone see Peter Jenning tonight who did a report on the Shroud? He showed this guy called Wilson on how the Medieval forgery could have been done? My faith does not stand or fall by the Shroud. What bothered me is the way the report mentioned how the C-14 tests refuted the shroud but never mentioned the recent Chemist who has refuted the c-14 tests as having been contaminated. I think in interest of objectivity the Chemist should have at least been mentioned?
Click to expand...
Why would you watch Peter Jennings anyway? He has no credibility with the news which he “reads” much less anything else.
 
Actually I didn’t. I walked in a room where a family member was watching and caught the last two minutes. I normally do not watch him.
 
Wanna bet Dan Rather will verify the report?

Anything to get in on Holy Week. Have they no shame…
 
[D*id anyone see Peter Jenning tonight who did a report on the Shroud? He showed this guy called Wilson on how the Medieval forgery could have been done? My faith does not stand or fall by the Shroud. What bothered me is the way the report mentioned how the C-14 tests refuted the shroud but never mentioned the recent Chemist who has refuted the c-14 tests as having been contaminated. I think in interest of objectivity the Chemist should have at least been mentioned?/

Isn’t it ironic that in spite of tons of evidence in favor of the Shroud, Jennings selectively chooses the ‘one ounce’ of speculation against it. And then portrays this as the ‘scientific authority’ on the subject.
The old 1988 carbon-dating test was conclusively shown to have come from a ‘newer’ patch sewn into the shroud after the fire of the 16th century. This has been common knowledge for years.
A real journalist would have done his homework. Perhaps Jennings is not an authentic journalist.
 
40.png
philipmarus:
Actually I didn’t. I walked in a room where a family member was watching and caught the last two minutes. I normally do not watch him.
Click to expand...
You let a family member watch Peter Jennings??? 😃
 
I just saw a story on FOX news that the Guy Peter Jenning used has already been refuted. And I have stubborn family members that insist on watching him.
 
Why do I find it strange that Peter Jennings did a special report on UFOs, and now on the Shroud? It would be especially strange if he tried to be unbiased and give both sides of the story on UFOs, and then didn’t give equal time to both sides on the shroud.
 
40.png
philipmarus:
Did anyone see Peter Jenning tonight who did a report on the Shroud? He showed this guy called Wilson on how the Medieval forgery could have been done?
Click to expand...
I think I remember I’ve seen this Wilson guy on TV before, but not with Peter Jennings. He was on Home Improvement and always hid behind a fence because he didn’t have the courage to support his own convictions.
 
After Dan Rather’s fiasco, why would anyone take these goons seriously???
 
40.png
Corinthians:
I think I remember I’ve seen this Wilson guy on TV before, but not with Peter Jennings. He was on Home Improvement and always hid behind a fence because he didn’t have the courage to support his own convictions.
Click to expand...
Too bad there’s not a fence up in front of Jennings.
 
I kind of like Peter Jennings, I hope we will all pray for his healing. The Shroud may or may not be authentic. I am leaning toward its authenticity, although it doesn’t bother me in the least.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top