Shroud of Turin Conference

[HagiaSophia]

The Dallas International Shroud of Turin Conference, a scientific gathering for presenting research papers on what is thought to be the 2,000-year old burial cloth of the historic Jesus, will meet Sept. 8 to 11 in Dallas.

The gathering of scientists and scholars is expected to shed new light on the age-old question of whether the image on the Shroud is a visible projection of Christ’s resurrection, as some believers claim, or a clever medieval fake.

The Dallas International Shroud of Turin Conference, which is held every few years and features about 30 presenters in many academic fields, is sponsored by three internationally known Shroud organizations.

They include the 400-year-old CENTRO shroud organization headquartered in Turin, Italy; the 50-year old Holy Shroud Guild, based in Esopus, N.Y.; and the American Shroud of Turin Association for Research, a scientific organization located in Dallas.

“The Turin Catholic Church authorities, who are the papal custodians of the shroud, will for the first time attend and participate in an international conference outside of Turin,” Michael Minor, AMSTAR vice-president and Dallas conference coordinator, said in a news release.

“The Dallas conference is the first international Shroud conference which is open to the general public,” AMSTAR president Tom D’Muhala said.

christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles%20Aug05/Art_Aug05_15.html

 

[twiztedseraph]

HagiaSophia:

The Dallas International Shroud of Turin Conference, a scientific gathering for presenting research papers on what is thought to be the 2,000-year old burial cloth of the historic Jesus, will meet Sept. 8 to 11 in Dallas.

The gathering of scientists and scholars is expected to shed new light on the age-old question of whether the image on the Shroud is a visible projection of Christ’s resurrection, as some believers claim, or a clever medieval fake.

The Dallas International Shroud of Turin Conference, which is held every few years and features about 30 presenters in many academic fields, is sponsored by three internationally known Shroud organizations.

They include the 400-year-old CENTRO shroud organization headquartered in Turin, Italy; the 50-year old Holy Shroud Guild, based in Esopus, N.Y.; and the American Shroud of Turin Association for Research, a scientific organization located in Dallas.

“The Turin Catholic Church authorities, who are the papal custodians of the shroud, will for the first time attend and participate in an international conference outside of Turin,” Michael Minor, AMSTAR vice-president and Dallas conference coordinator, said in a news release.

“The Dallas conference is the first international Shroud conference which is open to the general public,” AMSTAR president Tom D’Muhala said.

christianexaminer.com/Articles/Articles%20Aug05/Art_Aug05_15.html

Funny how scientific evidence goes back and forth but faith remains

 

[Michael_Welter]

I’ve always been fascinated by the shroud of Turin. In fact, I just started reading a book about it. I don’t know if it’s real or fake. I guess I don’t feel strongly eaither way. But I must say, if it’s stumped so many scientists for so long, can it be fake? Was there technology in mideivel times to create a fake that could stump modern scientists? That seems unlikely.

 

[BibleReader]

Michael Welter:

I’ve always been fascinated by the shroud of Turin. In fact, I just started reading a book about it. I don’t know if it’s real or fake. I guess I don’t feel strongly eaither way. But I must say, if it’s stumped so many scientists for so long, can it be fake? Was there technology in mideivel times to create a fake that could stump modern scientists? That seems unlikely.

Shroud researchers Clive and Picknett make a decent case of the theory that the Shroud is a 15th to 16th century “photo” generated in a room-size box camera called a camera obscura where linen sprayed with a mix of egg whites and human urine was exposed twice to a dead man suspended in the sunlight outside the camera obscura.

They found that their camera obscura image had a “focal ring” image on the bridge of the nose, and so does the Shroud image…

mtholyoke.edu/courses/adurfee/calculus/shroud-neg.jpg

 

[Michael_Welter]

BibleReader:

Shroud researchers Clive and Picknett make a decent case of the theory that the Shroud is a 15th to 16th century “photo” generated in a room-size box camera called a camera obscura where linen sprayed with a mix of egg whites and human urine was exposed twice to a dead man suspended in the sunlight outside the camera obscura.

I think I’ve heard that theory before, but I can’t help but ask, how on earth would they come up with that method, and why?

 

[BibleReader]

Michael Welter:

I think I’ve heard that theory before, but I can’t help but ask, how on earth would they come up with that method, and why?

Because Leonardo reportedly has 270 sketches of camera obscuras in his notebooks?

 

[Michael_Welter]

BibleReader:

Because Leonardo reportedly has 270 sketches of camera obscuras in his notebooks?

OK, but what would give them the idea to mix egg whites and human urine? That must have come after a long night of heavy drinking.

 

[Nan_S]

BibleReader:

Shroud researchers Clive and Picknett make a decent case of the theory that the Shroud is a 15th to 16th century “photo” generated in a room-size box camera called a camera obscura where linen sprayed with a mix of egg whites and human urine was exposed twice to a dead man suspended in the sunlight outside the camera obscura. They found that their camera obscura image had a “focal ring” image on the bridge of the nose, and so does the Shroud image.

That theory is ridiculous. It might have had some weight:

1. If the recorded chain-of-evidence history of the shroud dated to the 15th or 16th century. But the modern history of the shroud actually dates back to the year 1306 when it emerged in the hands of the Knights Templar, about 100 years after the “Cloth of Edessa” disappeared from Constantinople when the Knights sacked the city.
2. If the image on the shroud was blurry or fuzzy in detail. This theory HAS been tested and found inadequate. The exposure time required to make a camera obscura (pinhole camera) image on a cloth treated like that was not seconds or minutes - it took MANY HOURS. Remember - the sun and earth move relative to each other. That means that the light angle would be constantly changing, seriously obscuring the image. And that’s BEFORE you consider that the slightest breeze would move the body and hair.
3. If the image on the shroud was of skin surface only. Close examination of the image actually shows the underlying bone structure. No photograph can show that. Only an image produced by radiation has that kind of bone resolution.

Conclusion: Shroud detractors Clive and Picknett are full of hot air. They made a few bucks selling a book, then quickly disappeared into obscurity themselves when their claims were disproven.

 

[BibleReader]

**1. If the recorded chain-of-evidence history of the shroud dated to the 15th or 16th century. But the modern history of the shroud actually dates back to the year 1306 when it emerged in the hands of the Knights Templar, about 100 years after the “Cloth of Edessa” disappeared from Constantinople when the Knights sacked the city.
**
I think that there was a real Shroud, and the fake Shroud was created around the time of Leonardo and substituted-in for it, so that people would come in and ooh and ahh at the fake, while the thieves possessing the really Shroud kept it locked-up some place.

2. If the image on the shroud was blurry or fuzzy in detail. This theory HAS been tested and found inadequate. The exposure time required to make a camera obscura (pinhole camera) image on a cloth treated like that was not seconds or minutes - it took MANY HOURS. Remember - the sun and earth move relative to each other. That means that the light angle would be constantly changing, seriously obscuring the image. And that’s BEFORE you consider that the slightest breeze would move the body and hair.

I’ve seen a camera obscura image of the Schuykill River waterfront in Philadelphia known as “boathouse row.” It took hours to expose, because it, too, was an egg white image. The detail was remarkable.

How many images did a Renaissance DaVinci, financed by a rich sponsor, make before generating the final image? I.e., how many experiments did he run to overcome details such as you suggest? Thousands? The camera obscuras in Italy and England are made of bricks and mortar. They have lasted for centuries. I.e., they are permanent structures, built for thousands of experiments.

3. If the image on the shroud was of skin surface only. Close examination of the image actually shows the underlying bone structure. No photograph can show that. Only an image produced by radiation has that kind of bone resolution.

I was never convinced by those visual bone structure analyses. One fellow wrote a book on Indian carvings on rock in New Jersey, with diagram after diagram of faces of Indians carved onto rocks by the pimpling method. I went to a few of those rocks and checked. The guy was dreaming. There was nothing there. A member of our amateur archaeology club went to the same rocks with the author of the book. The club member said that the books author excitedly pointed to bumps and shapes in the rock and really did believe that he saw faces, but they just weren’t there.

In my opinion, the facial bone business is the same kind of dream. So is that business about stamped Roman symbols on the Shroud – I forget what it was, it’s been years since I pulled out my Shroud stuff.

No matter what, nobody ever explains the ring crossing the bridge of the nose, to a satisfactory extent. It’s as clear as day, yet many Shroudies, in their enthusiasm, just don’t see it.**
**

 

[Lazerlike42]

I can see what you’re talking about but I notice two things:

1. It could simply be the little boney things on the sides of your nose. Some people have more pronounced ones than others, and I’m not sure what ethnicity has to do with it.
2. It’s not even. If it was created by some pinhole, than the pinhole had to have been skewed or an ellipse, because the left side is clearly higher than the right side. A circle could not have created that.

 

[Nan_S]

BibleReader:

I think that there was a real Shroud, and the fake Shroud was created around the time of Leonardo and substituted-in for it, so that people would come in and ooh and ahh at the fake, while the thieves possessing the really Shroud kept it locked-up some place.

Interesting theory, with no supporting evidence. During Leonardo’s time, the shroud was VERY carefully guarded, and sealed in a reliquary that had four different locks with the keys in the hands of four different people. It was that very over-zealous security that caused the shroud to be nearly destroyed for all time when the Cathedral at Turin was burned in 1532, and the key-holders couldn’t be summoned in time.

How do you create a fake that matches the burn marks from the 1532 fire?

BibleReader:

I’ve seen a camera obscura image of the Schuykill River waterfront in Philadelphia known as “boathouse row.” It took hours to expose, because it, too, was an egg white image. The detail was remarkable.

The structures are fairly clear. Did you notice the little people in the image? No? Maybe that’s because anything that moved during those hours wasn’t recorded clearly.

Same result comes when trying to photograph a human body for the shroud image: If it was alive, it would not be able to be still long enough. If it was dead and hanging outside in bright sunlight, decomposition would cause shifting of the limbs before even one side of the image could be completed, much less both sides (which are perfectly aligned). And alive or dead, the hair would still be shifted by the wind. Finally, if the image was of a statue, the detail would be seriously lacking.

BibleReader:

How many images did a Renaissance DaVinci, financed by a rich sponsor, make before generating the final image? I.e., how many experiments did he run to overcome details such as you suggest? Thousands? The camera obscuras in Italy and England are made of bricks and mortar. They have lasted for centuries. I.e., they are permanent structures, built for thousands of experiments.

Where are those thousands of other images? In the icon-crazy world of the 16th century, surely at least one of them would have survived. Yet there is no other image, nor is there even a written account of Leonardo attempting this experiment.

BibleReader:

I was never convinced by those visual bone structure analyses.
In my opinion, the facial bone business is the same kind of dream. So is that business about stamped Roman symbols on the Shroud – I forget what it was, it’s been years since I pulled out my Shroud stuff.

The stamped Roman symbols are the patterns on the coins placed on the eyes. They are the coins of Pontius Pilate. I saw another diagram where someone was showing what appeared to be lettering written on the sides of the head which proclaimed the image to be of Jesus. If true, that lettering is now too faint to be read reliably.

The bone structure detail is best observed on the face and hands. The reason the hands look abnormally long is that the underlying bones can be seen.

BibleReader:

No matter what, nobody ever explains the ring crossing the bridge of the nose, to a satisfactory extent. It’s as clear as day, yet many Shroudies, in their enthusiasm, just don’t see it.

That’s because it’s not a camera focus ring.

I see that circle line - on only one side. It reverses direction to continue downward along the nose, then changes direction again to follow the irregular curve of the nostril.

Funny place to put a focus ring, anyway, near the very top of the image. Wouldn’t it make more sense to have the ring positioned near the breastbone? That assumes, of course, that camera obscuras (lens-less cameras) even used focusing mechanisms. In my experience, they don’t.