Hat tips to several people including Kelly, Paulette and an old, friend, Fr. Howard for this link to the YouTube featuring Barrie. The radio interview (audio only) with Barrie starts at the 1:16:00 so you may want to set the slider to that point. And no, the picture of the paratroopers firing at who-knows-what has nothing to do with the interview:
Here is a short summary from “Malc” on a site called The One Truth, a site also linking to the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoaxxNf7qdA#t=4619)
In the latter half, researcher and photographer Barrie Schwortz talked about the Shroud of Turin, said to be the burial cloth of Jesus, and reacted to new research that connects the Shroud’s creation to an ancient earthquake around 32 AD. According to the latest researchers’ theory, the powerful quake could have released neutron emissions that might have interacted with the fibers of the linen burial cloth, inducing the chemical reaction that created the unique facial image. Their research is problematic in several ways, including an overestimation of the magnitude strength of quakes in the Dead Sea, he noted. Further, the radiation hypothesis (which has previously been proposed to explain the Shroud numerous times) was explored by (the late) Raymond Rogers, a scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, and he did not find evidence for it in his testing of samples.
While scientific tests have shown that the Shroud is neither a painting or a photograph, it still remains a mystery even after all the chemistry, physics, and spectrometry that have been applied, Schwortz remarked, adding that perhaps as technology continues to advance, new methods of testing may yield answers. He also shared details about his personal experiences studying and photographing the Shroud, and how his faith and religious views were affected by it.
The owner reclassified the video for private use only.
Joe Marino passes this along. Call it homemade reality TV. Watch as a man tells his son that the Shroud has been studied for “30 or 40 years.” Skip the bit about Starbucks and play the segment about the shroud beginning just shy of the three minute mark (2:59).
Here is a recently uploaded discussion between Shroud Encounter Presenter Russ Breault and Pastor Caspar McCloud of The Upper Room & Caspar McCloud Ministries, Inc. (Audio plus pictures, runs just over an hour).
This is a presentation, just last week, by John Jackson to the Atheist Community of Colorado Springs (more details below). It’s handheld shaky and the audio leaves a lot to be desired; headphone will help. Enjoy.
Description at YouTube at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DPwwHzN360
Science on Tap – What does science have to say about the Shroud of Turin?
The Colorado Springs Science Center Project Presents:
Dr. John Jackson, Ph.D. President of the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado
January 13, 2014 6:30pm to 8:00pm
CS Science on Tap is an outreach program of the Colorado Springs Science Center Project
The views and opinions expressed by speakers do not necessarily state or reflect those of Science on Tap or the Science Center Project, it just provides a forum for discussion.
Dr. John Jackson was the leader of the 1978 scientific team that studied the Shroud. He received his Ph.D. in Physics in 1972 from the Naval Postgraduate School with a dissertation on theoretical Cosmology. He was Chief of the Advanced Weapon Concept group at the Air Force Weapons Laboratory (1972-1976), Associate Professor of Physics at the United States Air Force Academy (1976-1980), Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs (1980-1983), Sr. Scientist at Kaman Sciences (1983-1992), Adjunct scientist at the Institute for Defense Analyses (1992-2010), Presently retired and President of the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado (1990-2013).
The Shroud of Turin was studied in 1978 by a group of scientists who professionally worked at major laboratories in the United States. Data collection from the Shroud included scientific photography, reflectance spectroscopy, X-Ray fluorescence, sample removal for chemical analysis, microscopy, etc. This group subsequently met at six month intervals for three years to review results and published these results in peer-reviewed scientific journals. An overview of what was obtained will be discussed, including comments on the subsequent radiocarbon measurement of the Shroud in 1988.
Hat tip to Joe Marino.
Joe Marino passed along this video, not recommending its position, mind you, but making us aware of it. It is called Conserving the Shroud of Turin. It is an English voiceover of a presentation by Professor Bruno Barberis last March.
The historical content is interesting. The need for the restoration is questionable, at best. I draw your attention to The “Restoration” of the Turin Shroud: A Conservation And Scientific Disaster by William Meacham appearing in e-Conservation Magazine. The abstract reads:
In 2002 the Shroud of Turin was subjected to a radical intervention aimed at ridding the relic of carbon dust and charred material said to pose a serious threat to the image. Patches that were applied in 1534 to cover holes from fire damage were removed. Vacuuming was done of portions of both sides, and other remedial measures were taken to optimise the appearance of the relic. This aggressive operation was in stark contrast with modern precepts of conservation, and resulted in important scientific data and heritage features being lost, along with great opportunities for sophisticated testing and sampling. The long-term negative impact of the intervention is feared to be substantial; the underlying premise, that the image was threatened, has been shown to be false.
John Klotz writes:
To one and all,
I am beginning my examination of the Shroud applying Occam’s Razor when I ran across a lecture on the web. The lecturer and his location are not identified.
The good part first. Printed under the digital display of the actual lecture were a few printed comments that I found quite pertinent and applicable including a quote from Einstein and a “classical Occam’s razor joke."
The quote was good but the joke is cosmologically hilarious.
If anyone cam advise who the lecturer is, I’d appreciate it although it was more of a personal, life adjusting exercise than scientific exploration.
First Einstein. Then the classical Occham Razor joke and then the URL
“’The great and wise Einstein is said to have said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.’ This got me thinking about simplicity. Thinking about simplicity is a dangerous thing to do, and sure enough I over thought it and cut myself on Occam’s Razor."
“If you don’t know what Occam’s Razor is, think about this classic joke,
“Sherlock Holmes and his sidekick Watson go on a camping trip. After sharing a few glasses of chardonnay, they retire for the night.
“At about 3 AM, Holmes nudges Watson and says, “Watson, look up into the sky and tell me what you see?”
“Watson said, “I see millions of stars.”
“Holmes asks, “And, what does that tell you?”
“Watson replies, “Astronomically, it tells me there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, it tells me that Saturn is in Leo. Theologically, it tells me that whatever made all of this is beyond human comprehension. Horologically, it tells me that it’s about 3 AM. Meteorologically, it tells me that we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. What does it tell you, Holmes?”
“Holmes retorts, “Watson you idiot, someone stole our tent.”
The lecturer who speaks with an English-Aussie-Kiwi (?) accent self identifies himself several times as a “progressive.” The backdrop indicates to me that he was addressing a “new age” or perhaps Buddhist audience. He bows at the end. It isn’t a scientific lecture on quantum mechanics but I must admit that the last ten minutes when he speaks of the difference between the “Complexity” of life and the “Complications” of life are very interesting.
There isn’t much relevant to my task in the lecture. I would like to quote but the textual introduction on the URL is priceless.
Can anyone help?
John, I found this, The C3Exchange, if it is of any help?
Yannick Clément never fails to surprise and amaze us. Here is an email I received from him. I suggest reading the email, watching the beginning of an introductory video that I suggest, then watching some of the video he recommends to us, rereading his email and then commenting. You might want to glance at these resources as well.
I’m currently watching with great interest a series of history courses given at Yale University in 2009 (I think) concerning the New Testament that are available on Youtube and I came across one very interesting part in which the professor (a very good one) talk about the so-called exchange of letters between King Abgar and Jesus. This can be found at the very beginning of this video: 17. New Testament Yale – Colossians and Ephesians*
* Note: the professor is Dale Martin, Woolsey Professor of Religious Studies at Yale University (first watch 1. New Testament Yale- Introduction)
I would like you to watch this and note how evident it is for this expert in history (as well as it is for all the other experts if we believe what the teacher says about that) that those letters are not authentic at all. In fact, after the long research I have done personally on the subject, I’m very confident to state that those letters were probably produced by a forger in Edessa between the late 2nd and the 3rd Century in order to back-up the “orthodoxy” of the main Christian Church in this city (by making believe that the Church was founded right after the Ascension of Christ, by someone (Addai or Thaddeus) who was a direct disciple of Jesus), at a time when there were many “heretical” doctrines proposed by various groups of Christians (some of which were already present in the region of Edessa around that time).
Taking this HISTORICAL FACT into account (look like this is something Ian Wilson haven’t done), I ask you this: Since the whole Abgar legend is mainly resting on those (false) letters supposedly written by Abgar and Jesus, how in the world can the Mandylion (which is a much later addition to the legend) can have any chance to be authentic?
I ask you this good question on a personal level, but feel free to share my email (and my question) with all the bloggers out there… It’s up to you!
I have never believed the letters were real but thought it was reasonable that the shroud made its way to Edessa. That something was in Edessa that sounds like the shroud still seems like a real possibility.
Mike Morcous writes:
I Just ran into this video, I really like how he explains the crossbeam marks and the left knee cap injury. Makes a lot of sense but I don’t know the reference.
Thoughts on this new video that was just uploaded earlier this month?
- Friday 20/12/2013 at 22:00
- Saturday 21/12/2013 at 1:00
- Saturday 21/12/2013 at 13:00
The existence of Jesus Christ and his subsequent resurrection have always generated intense debate. Is it just a mystery of faith or actually it is a historical fact? Different objects show the presence of the son of God on Earth. The Shroud, for example, is a fabric that would have wrapped the body of Jesus for burial. But it is not the only element of this type. There are also other items that remain from that time. In this research, science and faith come together to try to find an answer to the enigmas of the Holy Sepulchre. Jesus Christ it really existed?
Here is a trailer in English:
Full-length versions of these documentaries seem to make it onto YouTube within a month or two of first broadcast. Here is a link to the Sydonia page on the documentary. Sydonia is the production company.
Simon Brown’s latest YouTube and stirring music published late last month. Enjoy!
This YouTube video The Shroud of Turin & the Light Body was just published four days ago so the electrons may not be dry yet. Handle with care. Don’t forget to wear your tinfoil hat. Here is some of the description of the video:
The Shroud of Turin as you have never heard it discussed. That’s because William Henry and sindinologist James Barrett take a completely new look at the shroud, based on their deep knowledge of early Christianity and what only researchers like William know about the light body, which is what probably created the image on the shroud. Then Linda Moulton Howe interviews a close encounter witness with a message for our future.
The historical records for the shroud can be separated into two time periods: before 1390 and from 1390 to the present. The period until 1390 is subject to debate among historians. Author Ian Wilson has proposed that the Shroud was the Image of Edessa, but scholars such as Averil Cameron have stated that the history of the Image of Edessa represents "very murky territory", can not be traced back as a miraculous image and it may not have even been a cloth.
Ads break in in unexpected places in the hour long video, which is helpful because you do need to catch your breath or pour a drink or something.
I like Gary Habermas. I like his books about the resurrection from a well reasoned historical perspective. But this quick apologetic, published yesterday, is simply not helpful. As I see it, it is aa reasoned argument based on a mixture of fanciful speculation and inaccurate statements. Too bad!
Here is a rough transcription of a piece of it:
The conclusion of many if not most studies is that you have radiation coming out from the dead body . . . and the latest experiments just released six months ago put it in the first century . . . plus or minus 250 years and that the cause was radiation from a dead body. The body is dead and the radiation is coming out because it is bringing inner parts out like for example teeth . . .
Comments at YouTube are turned off for this video. They are not turned off here.
Paul to Timothy: When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas,
also the books, and above all the parchments.
– 2 Timothy 4:13 (NRSV)
About a week ago, Simon Brown uploaded a video, Solid Proof Turin Shroud is 1st Century! which was produced by his friend David Roberts. It runs about ten minutes. It is interesting.
Is it a bit of a stretch?
He joins Fr. Joseph Mary Wolfe to discuss the shroud on the Eternal Word Television Network (EWTN), the American-based television network of around-the-clock Catholic-themed programming. The 56 minute broadcast was November 6, 2013.
This YouTube video of Barrie just showed up on a blog, Putting focus on science: Scientific photography and visual representation of science at its best. It runs 55 minutes. It is good lecture, worth watching. Click on the image to link to the video.
Nice, five-minute GodTube video featuring Gary Habermas, Could the Shroud of Turin really be the actual burial garment of Jesus?
From Gary’s website we learn:
Gary Habermas has dedicated his professional life to the examination of the relevant historical, philosophical, and theological issues surrounding the death and resurrection of Jesus. His extensive list of publications and debates provides a thorough account of the current state of the issue. Christian believers as well as unbelievers may find within the contents of this site a strong argument for the philosophical possibility of miracles and the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus, as well as the theological and practical implications of this event.
Stop at six minutes. But if you want, Gateway Anabaptist Church in Michigan has hours and hours of lectures on just about anything.
I watched the twelve-minute segment of 60 Minutes about Bill O’Reilly and his new book (see my earlier September 27 posting, The Gospel According to Bill O’Reilly). I was amazed at the man’s arrogance. Here is how CBS bills the interview conducted by Norah O’Donnell:
The Gospel according to Bill O’Reilly?
September 29, 2013 4:00 PM
Bill O’Reilly, the king of cable TV news, says the Holy Spirit tapped him to write "Killing Jesus" – a book that refutes parts of the Bible
Watch it by clicking on the image above.
Here are some choice bits posted by Anugrah Kumar in the Christian Post right after the show aired:
"And I believe – because I’m a Catholic – that comes from the Holy Spirit. My inspiration comes from that. And so I wrote Killing Jesus because I think I was directed to write that," added O’Reilly in the interview with Norah O’Donnell that will air on Sunday evening.
O’Donnell asked O’Reilly if he thinks he’s a chosen one. "I’m just one of many who have been given gifts," replied the anchor of "The O’Reilly Factor." "I can write. I can bloviate on TV. So I’m trying to use the gifts in a positive way. And I believe that’s all directed and that’s why I’m here on the planet."
In Killing Jesus, O’Reilly "details the events leading up to the murder of the most influential man in history: Jesus of Nazareth," according to publisher Henry Holt and Company, which paid the two authors $10 million as advance
Some parts of the book contradict the New Testament’s accounts of the crucifixion. For example, O’Reilly believes Jesus couldn’t have spoken the words, "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do," because the crucifixion wouldn’t have allowed enough air in His lungs.
“several thoughts popped into my mind”
I recently rewatched a Shroud program titled "Shreds of Evidence" shown on A&E cable network on 4/21/95. It was a BBC/Timewatch production. I believe that was the 1st time it had been broadcast in the United States. I’m not sure when it was first shown in England. But it was actually produced in 1988, per the date listed at the end of the video and something else I’ll mention in a minute.
The program starts out with the late Fr. Peter Rinaldi, a well-known Shroud advocate, going to the Cathedral to pray before the Shroud. But when I tell you that David Sox was interviewed a lot and was the program consultant, you will be able to guess what direction the program heads. Sox is an American Episcopal priest who has been living in England for some decades now. He was the 1st General Secretary of the British Society for the Turin Shroud and seemingly pro-Shroud in the 70s until he apparently became convinced by the evidence put forth by McCrone, who believed it showed that the Shroud was a fake.
Sox, as many of you know, had the book The Shroud Unmasked printed and ready to go when the C-14 dates were released in October 1988. Against the protocol set for the C-14 labs, he was given advance information about the results, and I believe was even allowed to observe the actual testing at Zurich.
The program paints a picture of pro-Shroud scientists, including STURP of course, as those who have let their religious feelings get in the way of their scientific objectivity. It paints a picture of C-14 being pretty much fool-proof. It paints a picture of science pretty much always proving that religion is rarely if ever on the same level as science. It paints a picture of the 14th century being a time of many relics and very much into suffering, implying that the Shroud fits in perfectly with that time as a man-made object. The point is made that people in the 14th century literally paid to see the Shroud.
What really jumped out at me at the end of the program was when the rolling text gave the dates that the British Museum received the results from Zurich and Arizona and Oxford was delayed. It then said that the official results were expected in September. So this documentary was already complete in summer 1988! So Sox not only had his book ready to go when the dates were announced, he was significantly involved in a documentary completed before the dates were even announced.
I think this is interesting in light of the later discovery that "anonymous businessmen" made a 1 million pound donation to Oxford for ostensibly having proven the Shroud to be a forgery. And, of course, we know that the British Museum’s Dr. Michael Tite, who was billed as the independent overseer of the 1988 C-14 dating, left the museum and took the place of the late Dr. Edward (Teddy) Hall, when he resigned shortly after the dating and after the lab had received the donation.
Knowing that Sox’s book was ready to go when the results were announced and that "Shreds of Evidence" was produced even before the official dates were announced, several thoughts popped into my mind:
*Was having both the book and documentary ready before the official dates were announced designed as a specific psychological attack on those who believed the Shroud to be authentic? If so, what individuals or groups were involved?
*Were there any connections/associations between the publisher of Sox’s book, BBC/Timewatch, which put out the documentary, and the "anonymous businessmen" that donated the million pounds to Oxford?
*We may never know the answers, but I have a feeling that if we did, there would be some shocking revelations.
The concept of a cloth falling into the underlying body region and receiving an image, in essence, requires that two separate assumptions be made. First, we must assume that the body became mechanically "transparent" to its physical surroundings and, second, that a stimulus was generated that recorded the passage of the cloth through the body region onto the cloth as an image. With regard to the latter assumption, it is unclear in an a priori sense what to assume for the physical nature of the stimulus. However, we at least know that it was able to interact physically with cloth; otherwise, image discolorations would not have been formed. I propose that, as the Shroud collapsed through the underlying body, radiation emitted from all points within that body discolored the cloth so as to produce the observed image. As will be seen below, this assumption  explains the superficiality of the Shroud image and, perhaps, the differentiation in fibril coloring.
— John P. Jackson
"Cloth Collapse theory" to explain the origin of the Shroud’s image is, in my opinion, one of the most important things ever written about the Shroud of Turin. This is because it claims to, and I agree that it does, "explain all image characteristics found on the shroud image."
And now for the video: yes, that is a nose you are looking at. It is Jackson’s presentation of his hypothesis at a St. Louis Symposium in the video, "What is Missing? " You will need to download it in WMV format from Shroud University. It runs a little bit over an hour (1:18).
Weekly, it seems, maybe more often, the Huffington Post carries a story about some biblical archaeological discovery. The latest, yesterday, was: Dalmanutha, Biblical Town Mentioned In Gospel Of Mark, Possibly Discovered Archaeologists Claim.
With each such article, the online paper includes a gallery of pictures with supporting video reports of other biblical archaeological topics. One of these, for months and months now it seems, has been about the shroud; the caption reads, “Shroud of Turin: A series of experiments conducted by Italian researchers indicate the Shroud of Turin is likely authentic, but the team has not yet reached a definite conclusion.”
It is the ENEA/UV/Laser story from December nearly two years ago best summarized thus:
Last year scientists were able to replicate marks on the cloth using highly advanced ultraviolet techniques that weren’t available 2,000 years ago — or during the medieval times, for that matter.
Kept alive, not exactly viral, but linked to over and over and over, maybe forever and forever.