A reader writes:
I want to watch the Real Face of Jesus before Easter. Will the History Channel being showing again this year?
The online schedule for the History Channel (in the U.S.) only goes out to March 16 and Easter (Gregorian) is March 31. My bet is that the History Channel will show it again around Easter in the U.S., the U.K. and on some of other international History channels. So watch the schedule.
But you have several good options for watching this highly rated Shroud of Turin documentary:
1) You can watch it by linking to YouTube or you can watch it right here.
2) For $1.99, you can purchase a downloadable version (search for “Real face of Jesus”). This can be viewed with many television set top boxes, such as TIVO, or on your computer. You can watch it as often as you want. This version is available in HD format.
3) Tor $3.99, you can also purchase an Apple iTunes version for the iPad, iPhone or your computer.
4) For $24,95, you can buy the DVD from Amazon or the History Channel. It is often on sale for less.
I keep a fully licensed version on my laptop and another one on my iPhone. I’ve used the iPhone version with a large-screen projector to show clips of the show to an audience.
Here is how Barrie reports it at shroud.com:
It was announced this morning that Pope Benedict XVI, as one of his last acts as Pontiff, has authorized a television only exhibition of the Shroud of Turin on March 30, 2013 (Holy Saturday) directly from the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist where the cloth is permanently stored. Here is an excerpt from an e-mail I received this morning from my friend Bruno Barberis, President of the International Center for the Study of the Shroud (Centro Internazionale di Sindonologia) in Turin with the details:
I would like to give you in advance an important piece of news. On March 30th (Holy Saturday) in the late afternoon (Italian time) in the Turin Cathedral there will be a TV exposition of the Holy Shroud. The exposition will be broadcast by the RAI Uno television network. This event, connected with the "Year of Faith," will happen 40 years after the first and unique TV exposition of the Shroud on November 23rd, 1973. The Shroud will remain in its room in the Cathedral and the length of the exposition will be around one hour. On March 1st in Turin at 11.00am a press conference will be held regarding this special exposition.
It is likely that footage from this exposition will be picked up and shown by other television broadcast networks around the world and on the internet. I will do my best to keep you updated as more details become available. In the interim, you can also check our Facebook page, where I can quickly post any news that may come in while I am traveling and lecturing.
For more information on the unprecedented occasion of this first "technological" exhibition of the Shroud, check out the news page (in English) of the Collegamento pro Sindone website by Emanuela Marinelli. The page includes more details on Pope Benedict’s decision to display the Shroud and a message from Msgr. Cesare Nosiglia, the current Archbishop of Turin. As always, our deepest thanks to Emanuela for making this information available so quickly. Grazie!
For those of you who missed the Super Bowl ad, “Miracle Stain: No Stain is Sacred.”
Hat tip to Joe Marino for sending this along. Watch it here or directly on YouTube. It runs about 26 minutes.
Mark Knox nicely writes in The Shroud of Turin: New Developments in his blog Notes from the Crossroads:
When I was a child, my first exposure to the Shroud of Turin was on an episode of “In Search Of…”, a weekly television program that featured a number of various popular mysteries including Bigfoot, the Amelia Earhart disappearance and the Bermuda Triangle, among others. For this episode I sat enthralled as the show’s host, Leonard Nimoy, described how the shroud bore an image of the crucified Christ and that the image was undoubtedly caused by a huge transfer of energy at the moment of the Resurrection. I remember hurrying off to excitedly tell anyone who would listen all about the irrefutable facts presented by the program. Of course, what I eventually came to realize, after several increasingly disappointing conversations, was that “In Search Of” presented “irrefutable facts” (or omitted the refutable ones) in support of every mystery they featured; it was, of course, their bread and butter. Sadly, such childhood epiphanies are often the lynch-pin for of a life of skepticism; reaffirming the fact that truth is so important, and so elusive, in any argument or discourse.
So it was with my hard-earned skepticism that I sat down to watch The History Channel’s presentation of “The Real Face of Jesus” . . .
Like many other ancient mysteries, science will probably never have the capacity to prove exactly what the shroud is, but many modern scientists will easily tell you what it is not- it isn’t, in any scientifically explainable sense, a work of art created as an elaborate hoax.
And, if it isn’t a hoax, the thought of what it might be sends shivers down my spine.
Old TV shows can be fun to watch.
Bailey Packard, who prepared this great 23 minute video, writes in Shroud of Turin: Faith, Science, & History Come Together on a Piece of Cloth:
Probably the newest and coolest Shroud website with lots of great videos – The Enigma of the Shroud of Turin done by some hip dudes in England.
Hat tip to Joe Marino for providing information about this video
Hat tip to Joe Marino for providing information about this video
Lorie Wimble, who describes herself as the "Liberal Voice" of the political blog Conservative Haven, writes a nice summary to introduce the David Rolfe/BBC video, Shroud of Turin. The piece is posted today at TechI:
There have been many claims and a handful of studies about the famed Shroud of Turin over the last century that has culminated over the past two decades into a state of further mystery. Some believe it is a masterful fake crafted in the 14th century. Others believe it is the linen that wrapped the body of Jesus Christ prior to His resurrection. Most don’t consider at all, preferring to avoid the clash of science and religion that it represents.
The problem is that the “clash” seems to be heading towards a center point where science and religion merge.
Many thoughts of its authenticity were apparently debunked 20 years ago when carbon dating placed the linen-cotton mix of the shroud to the 14th century. Science investigated. Science spoke. The questions were put to rest. There are several problems that have risen since then that appear to cast more doubt on the accuracy of the dating than the authenticity of the shroud itself. The most glaring challenge that still has not been met is that with today’s advanced technology, we have not found a way to duplicate the effect. Many scientists and scholars have concluded beyond a doubt that there is no way it could have been created by natural or man-made means today, let alone 650 years ago.
The topic deserves a deeper study than we can put together today, but this video from the BBC touches on several very compelling pieces of evidence that the shroud existed well before the carbon dating said. More importantly, it shows how the shroud could not have been made by man.
Many contributors help shape The Spectator’s ‘Books of the Year’ edition. One of them is The Telegraph’s Christopher Howse who writes for that paper about Christianity and other faiths. It helps to read up to his comments about de Wesselow’s The Sign just to get a sense of his curmudgeonity:
. . . The most helpful piece of scholarship was Noel Malcolm’s translating the Latin version and appendix of Hobbes’s Leviathan in his monumental three-volume edition (Oxford, £195). I still haven’t got over the old devil insisting that God is corporeal. What could he have meant?
The best cover — to which the book lived up — this year used a wood engraving (reproduced below) of a shire horse by C.F. Tunnicliffe for the New Penguin Book of English Folk Songs, edited by Steve Roud and Julia Bishop (£25). Yet the same publisher also sent out a note this year saying that their volume on the Shroud of
Turin, Thomas de Wesselow’s The Sign (£20), was ‘one of the most important books we have published’. For important read stupid.
I’d like to know why Howse thinks it is stupid. Contrast this with what Barrie wrote on his site just a couple of days ago:
Speaking of the British Society for the Turin Shroud, the organization held its first public meeting in many years in Beaconsfield, England on Sunday, October 21, 2012. The highlight of the meeting was the presentation titled, "Why the Shroud of Turin Is Not a Medieval Hoax," made by featured speaker Dr. Thomas De Wesselow, acknowledged expert in medieval art and author of the recent book, "The Sign." Fortunately, the presentation was recorded on video by BSTS member David Rolfe and posted on his Shroud Enigma web page so you can watch it yourself. Of course, many readers already accept the scientific evidence that clearly demonstrates the Shroud is not any type of artwork, medieval or otherwise, but it is refreshing to hear it so clearly presented by a true expert in Medieval art history. This video is worth watching by every student of the Shroud and a "must see" for anyone who still believes the Shroud is a medieval hoax. I urge you to watch it and share it with your friends and family.
This website summarizes work connected with digitizing Shroud photographs taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931, enhancing the digitized images to improve details, translating the enhanced images “gray scale data into depth data”, generating a sequence of up to 625 images of each of these, and combining these images with a Holoprinter to produce holograms (3D images) of the Shroud. It also summarizes my study of these holograms and discovery of heretofore unseen details, which confirm many previous findings and reveal some suprises.
(Excerpt) Read more at shroud3d.com …
Several comments followed; “Gave me chills! I believe!”, gives you the idea.
There is nothing new here. But it is a subject well worth revisiting. Here is what I posted just over two years ago. Not one person commented at the time. Maybe I was just too wordy. Maybe I just said what nobody wanted to hear. Maybe . . . maybe. Any comments now?
(October 10, 2010 posting follows):
The pastor of a large parish in New Orleans wrote to me by email:
I think this new 3D image is the most convincing scientific evidence yet for arguing that the shroud is authentic.”
I strongly disagree. The pastor is referring to the red-cyan anaglyph image of the Shroud that you can see only with red and cyan 3D glasses. Personally, I feel that this is a work of art, an artist’s impression of what Jesus may have looked like, expressed in 3D. It doesn’t prove anything any more than the animated 3D movie, “Barbie and the Magic of Pegasus” proves that horses can fly. (Have I changed my mind since myfirst posting about the site? Yes.)
Here is what the pastor wrote:
The red/cyan anaglyph of the face from the Shroud of Turin at the website shroud3d.com is startling. Regrettably, the size of the image is reduced on the website. Fortunately it is done with HTML so you can grab the bigger sized jpeg and save it on your computer. Do so right away before they reduce the size on the server.Here is the link:
Note: I have replaced the pastor’s long link with a TinyURL. You can see a bigger image (800 by 921 rather than the web page size set to 484 by 545) just by using the following link. Do save a copy of the image on your computer and buy some inexpensive 3D glasses. Read on:
It is, of course, pointless to save this image unless you have red/cyan 3D glasses. The shroud3d website does have stereoscopic images for those who have the proper viewing equipment. It also has a short video showing slow and slight rotation of the image. But these are poor substitutions for looking at an anaglyph with 3D glasses. The anaglyph is fantastic. It will knock your socks off.
I took the bigger image and inserted it into a PowerPoint presentation. It looks great on an eight foot screen. Now all I have to do is buy 3D glasses for an upcoming talk at my church. I found some paper ones for $25.00 per hundred. I also had a poster of the anaglyph jpeg printed at Staples. It works great, too.
I think this new 3D image is the most convincing scientific evidence yet for arguing that the shroud is authentic.
No! The anaglyph may not be very scientific, at all. And that is a major concern because the impression one gets from the website and probably most places this image is displayed is that it is scientific. It may be, but if so, how so.
I am not at all convinced that the data found in the Shroud’s image supports the anaglyph on the website. I’m not convinced that adjustments that were made to the images (there seem to be many) are scientifically warranted. If this is so, if I am right, then the final product, the anaglyph at shroud3d.com must be thought of only as a work of art. Nothing more!
Red and cyan 3D glasses that I ordered from Amazon.com ($4.70) arrived earlier in the week. I have since examined the anaglyph for hours. I was glad to learn from the pastor — one of this blog’s readers — that the full size image was available and I have studied it on a high definition 55 inch monitor. My first reaction was not unlike our friend above. Really, do order some 3D glasses at Amazon and prepare to be amazed.
My second reaction was that there was something wrong.
Bernardo Galmarini, “the 3D expert that produced the conversion from 2D to 3D,” writes on the shroud3d site:
I thought at first, that in this more scientific conversion, the hidden information in the Shroud (3D information in the gray-scale), would be a nuisance or obstacle to produce a human representation of the face, and that I would have to struggle continuously against this. Strangely enough, this hidden scientific information in the Shroud became the key and the basis for this work, reducing my artistic work to only softening the “holes” and deformities (caused surely by the passing of time) and the adapting to what this scientific version commands you to do: filling in and normalizing the “holes” or “dead areas” in the hidden information of the linen. For example: the areas without information in the forehead have been corrected following the surrounding gray-scale with coherent information and with a normal human forehead in mind. This process was helped by the fact, that the central zone of the forehead and the bony structure of the orbits contain very coherent information and that of course was taken as a guideline.
That statement lacks needed clarity. There are certainly holes and deformities. Why is not clear in most cases. It seems completely unjustified to speculate that these are caused by the passing of time. Without knowing how the image was formed, without knowing much about how the shroud was stored or displayed over many centuries, we shouldn’t make such guesses.
Exactly what are the holes and deformities? They have not been detailed on the website. The bloodstains certainly are a problem and to make adjustments for these is perhaps warranted. But what about other deformities? How is the problem of banding addressed? Banding, a variegated background pattern to the cloth, perhaps the result of how the thread of the cloth was bleached and having nothing to do with the passing of time, is certainly the single biggest deformity that exists. It gets peculiar treatment in this new 3D work. The left side of the face (our right) has been partially retouched to minimize the effect. The other side of the face is shaped as though there was no banding but the banding remains. Pictured here is an estimate of the banding in the area of the face.
At the bottom of the beard and the lower areas of the hair, darker areas that are not the result of banding are strikingly evident. These relatively dark areas don’t recede towards the background as expected for grayscale plotting. (You can’t see this without 3D glasses. Don’t even try.) What is the rationale for this obviously apparent artistic adjustment? Moreover, hair above the forehead pompadours frontward without grayscale tones to support it. This hair and facial hair treatment seems artistic.
The entire head and shoulders seem to be completely detached from the background. You can, with 3D glasses on, move your own head ever so slightly and see detached movement. (Again, you can’t see this without 3D glasses.) Galmarini speaks of “hidden scientific information,” presumably but not explicitly the grayscale. I can’t find any data in support of this phenomenon. It seems as though an artificial outline has been introduced around the human form. There does not seem to be any such outline on the Shroud. In fact, researchers, over the years, have noted this lack of outline because it is something that an artist, had an artist created the Shroud, would have certainly included. Interestingly, the areas of the lower neck and upper shoulders, though darker than the background, don’t recede into the background and don’t show detached movement. Most amazingly, the lower part of a prominent water stain above the face is now worn in the hair like a miniature yarmulke while the upper part of the stain adorns the background. This, to my way of thinking, strongly suggests the use of false outlines. What other reason can there be other than to enhance the 3D effect?
The most surprising thing is that the grayscale tones that to the untrained eye look like highlights and shadows, but that in fact become the basis for plotting three-dimensionality, remain in place in the plotted image. If you plot a three-dimensional object from the grayscale density you should have something that looks like a stone statue. Whatever highlights and shadows seem to exist in any resulting computerized virtual-reality image should only be from artificially introduced light placed at a calculated angle and distance in the virtual world. This is what the VP8 Analyzer does and what other software packages such as POV-Ray do. But in the anaglyph in question, it looks as though the original image was stretched like a thin film over the calculated shape. Original highlights, shadows and even herringbone twill patterns are there.
I’m willing to be convinced that I am wrong, that the anaglyph in question is scientific. I would actually like this. If this were so we would have something that is truly amazing. Clarity is needed, however. Specifics are required. I would like to see how much of this conversion to 3D is reproducible in a scientific sense and how much is "only softening the ‘holes’ and deformities."
In order to claim that the 3D images on this site are scientific the steps and procedures must be reproducible by others, at least in theory. Documentation is needed.
- We should know the software or algorithm used to plot the image including any variables or settings used.
- The terminology “hidden scientific information” should be clarified. It is essential to understand how plotting software uses this data.
- Expose higher resolution images for examination if the work was done in higher resolution. While this image may be 800 pixels wide, the resolution is no better than 72 ppi. Ordinary books carry pictures at four times the number of pixels per inch.
- We should be able to see, in anaglyph form for comparison, the unadjusted, scientifically plotted part of the project so that we can judge for ourselves just how much of the final product is by way of adjustment.
- All adjustments made should be explained and justified.
It bothers me to think that these images will be used, as the pastor suggests, in presentations to show the 3D characteristics of the Shroud. These images are certainly being displayed in churches, in exhibits and on the internet without the qualification that this is art and not science. If that is so, it is most unfortunate.
On the other hand, if these images are truly scientific, then the unexplained screams out to be explained.
Don’t get me wrong. There is 3D data in the Shroud’s images. It is the most important quality for knowing that these are not images formed by reflected light as a painter would envision or a camera would capture a human form. The 3D data is a quality that must be accounted for in any hypothesis attempting to explain how the images were formed, be it miraculously, naturally, by fakery or even as honest art. Indeed, this quality, treated scientifically without various forms of electronic manipulation, sooner or later, may suggest how the images were formed.
I have uploaded Thomas De Wesselow’s talk given to the BSTS on Sunday Oct.21st.
Few members of this group harbour doubts that the Shroud is a medieval painting. However, for the vast majority, that is the answer they will give if asked the question: "What is the Shroud?" De Wesselow takes on this proposition head on and from first principles as only an expert in medieval art can.
The link to the talk is: http://www.shroud-enigma.com/BSTS/bsts-uk-homepage.html
Best wishes to all
Or just click here or on the photograph. It runs for about an hour.
INews Hollywood is reporting that A&E Television Faces Lawsuit Over Copyright of 3D Jesus Christ:
Raymond Downing, a New York-based 3D digital illustrator, is suing A&E Television Networks, owner of the History Channel, and Left Right Inc., a production company, for infringing the copyright of his virtual reproduction of Jesus by overusing material subject to a licensing agreement.
According to his lawsuit, which has just been moved to a New York federal court, Downing, and his Studio Macbeth firm, first created a virtual depiction of Abraham Lincoln, which he licensed to the History Channel for the 2009 show, Stealing Lincoln’s Body. Downing won an Emmy for his work.
An executive producer at History Channel then visited Downing’s studio and witnessed an exhibition of the 3D digital recreation of Jesus from the Shroud of Turin. Apparently impressed, the History Channel then licensed "Virtual Jesus" for a 2010 program called The Real Face of Jesus?
But Downing says the rights granted were limited — History was allegedly only allowed 10 graphic animation sequences and the rights were "non-transferable, non-sublicensable and related solely to the Real Face of Jesus Program for the History Channel."
Read the full article
Did we need to be reminded? Michael Riedel recalls rogue producers of the past in yesterday’s New York Post:
The “Rebecca” scandal has made me nostalgic for the Broadway of the ’70s and ’80s, when the street had a colorful selection of rascals and rogues and ticky-tacky productions that closed overnight.
Anyone remember “Into the Light,” a musical about the Shroud of Turin, that ran six performances in 1986?
The late writer Peter Stone dubbed it “Jesus Christ Tablecloth.”
MUST WATCH: There are three back-to-back 1986 reviews on this YouTube with amusing clips from the actual Broadway show. It leads me to wonder if the members of STURP, the Cardinal of Turin and all those priests and nuns ever danced and sang so wonderfully? It is worth seven minutes of your time if you value laughter.
Since both articles are in Italian, Joe sent along some translation text:
Shroud Not Medieval
A DVD documentary, Francesca Saracino, the result of a long investigation, finally brings to light the "raw data" Carbon 14 tests. Statisticians confirm that the operation of dating had failed.
The Night of the Shroud "a documentary investigation Francesca Saracino, produced by Paul Monks Freguglia for Polyphemus, in co-production with RAI and distributed in Italy by Medusa Home Entertainment from 10 October. The documentary will be released in the coming days, and contains an accurate reconstruction, with unpublished documents and testimonies of what is a real mosaic of secret intrigues and mysteries: the controversial examination of C14, a mystery not yet entirely clear on which still today many are questioning. Francesca Saracino and Paul Monks came into possession of a copy of the raw data of the laboratory of Arizona and partial raw data of the other two laboratories). The diocese of Turin has repeatedly called for the raw data of the laboratories, in order to verify the correctness of the procedures followed, but was never able to get it. Auditors states that in the report published by Nature, consistent with the raw data examined, "there is an arithmetic error." Omit any comment on the existence of an arithmetic error in a report prepared by scientists, overseen by the British Museum and published in Nature. But perhaps it is just an oversight. "A simple error, which were not the first to notice. A small arithmetic error but it is decisive because it makes you conclude that the material examined by the three laboratories is homogeneous. " This is important, because if a sample so small – a few inches of fabric – there is a lack of homogeneity in the age of the fabric so strong, when you consider the entire Shroud – four yards of linen – "we could have a ripple hundreds or even several thousand years. " He concludes Professor. Conti, from a strictly scientific point of view, "there is sufficient evidence in favor of the hypothesis that the Shroud is a medieval relic." So why the workshops, the British Museum, Nature and other players more or less obscure, endorsed, in the words of Franco Faia, associate prof. Luigi Gonella, "the greatest scientific fraud of all time"? "The Night of the Shroud" has many elements and suspects, according to which each can form an opinion, and why not bring forward solutions. But there’s enough to note, coldly, what is the opinion of scientists, supported by the figures.
If you want to read the entire article, go to Vatican Insider: [they list link below]
Night of the Shroud, a documentary raises the opposition to the tests C14
The authors have made the investigation to examine chemical and statistical raw data. Among them, the professor of statistics Pierluigi Conti, Sapienza University in
Franco Faia, who along with Luigi Gonella and John Riggi, Marche was the protagonist and witness the operation of the carbon dating of the Shroud 14, defines what happened then, bluntly states: "This is the biggest scam of all scientific time. "
These words Faia the pronunciation is "The Night of the Shroud" a documentary investigation Francesca Saracino, produced by Paul Monks Freguglia for Polyphemus, in co-production with RAI and distributed in Italy by Medusa Home Entertainment from 10 October.
The documentary will be released in the coming days, and contains an accurate reconstruction, with unpublished documents and testimonies of what is a real mosaic of secret intrigues and mysteries: the controversial examination of C14, a mystery not yet entirely clear on which still today many are questioning.
Vatican Insider has had access to preview the DVD as a whole and in particular the extra content, which has not disclosed, and what appears to be a real thriller. And especially interesting to us an unpublished document that sheds light illuminating the incident carbon-14, and the statement that the linen cloth kept in Turin was medieval.
Rebuild a brief history. Three laboratories (Tucson, Zurich, Oxford) had some tiny fragment of the Shroud to date it with the C14. The result of the tests, carried out in a continuous and persistent breach of the procedures, which threw a heavy shadow on the seriousness of the entity coordination, the British Museum – said 1290 to 1360. But the "raw data" of the examinations, that is, the basic figures which were used to compile the report were never made public.
Francesca Saracino and Paul Monks came into possession of a copy of the raw data of the laboratory of Arizona and partial raw data of the other two laboratories). The diocese of Turin has repeatedly called for the raw data of the laboratories, in order to verify the correctness of the procedures followed, but was never able to get it.
Auditors states that in the report published by Nature, consistent with the raw data examined, "there is an arithmetic error." Omit any comment on the existence of an arithmetic error in a report prepared by scientists, overseen by the British Museum and published in Nature. But perhaps it is just an oversight. "A simple error, which were not the first to notice. A small arithmetic error but it is decisive because it makes you conclude that the material examined by the three laboratories is homogeneous. "
But if you correct the error, Conti says, "we arrive at the opposite conclusion: that the age of the Shroud dated material from the laboratory of Arizona is different – 50, 60, 70 years – from dated material from the other two laboratories" . Conti is adamant: "This completely undermines the statistical conclusions derived from the article of Nature." A similar result, conducted with other statistical calculation methods, has been obtained independently by prof. Riani the University of Parma.
This is important, because if a sample so small – a few inches of fabric – there is a lack of homogeneity in the age of the fabric so strong, when you consider the entire Shroud – four yards of linen – "we could have a ripple hundreds or even several thousand years. " He concludes Professor. Conti, from a strictly scientific point of view, "there is sufficient evidence in favor of the hypothesis that the Shroud is a medieval relic."
So why the workshops, the British Museum, Nature and other players more or less obscure, endorsed "the greatest scientific fraud of all time"? "The Night of the Shroud" has many elements and suspects, according to which each can form an opinion, and why not bring forward solutions. But there’s enough to note, coldly, what is the opinion of scientists, supported by the figures.
MUST ATTEND BSTS MEETING: Davor Aslanovski (pictured) has signaled, through Meetup, that he will be attending the British Society for the Turin Shroud meeting in Beaconsfield, England on Sunday, October 21, 2012 from 2:00 PM to 6:00 PM. With Thomas De Wesselow, author of "The Sign", as a featured speaker, this should make for a very interesting meeting.
Too bad South Carolina is so far away.
IDEA: Why not video record the presentations and discussions and put them on YouTube. They would get a lot of attention if promoted in the various Shroud of Turin blogs.
I was recently informed that the 90 minute documentary, “The Real Face of Jesus?”, has aired 21 times in the U.S. That translates into many millions of viewers. Add to that many international showings and the many times the film has been downloaded from Amazon or iTunes. For several weeks it was the leading historical documentary on iTunes.
According to Adam’s Ale, this week EWTN is running a series on the Shroud of Turin on the series "Women of Grace." Today’s program reviewed the history of the Shroud and how it got to Turin in 1578.
Some of the circumstantial evidence for its antiquity includes the fact that when the Shroud (which had been hidden for several hundred years) was re-discovered around 500 AD, art and mosaic images of Jesus dramatically changed from a youthful unbearded "Roman" face to the man with a beard that we universally now see.
The remaining 4 programs will be broadcast this week at 11:00 am and re-aired at 11:30 pm. The most up-to-date scientific information and theories will be explored."
Here are some of the video’s on the EWTN site that you can watch now:
- Revelation of the Road: The Shroud’s Journey SEPTEMBER 10, 2012: (Program 10350) Guests: Dr. J. Wayne Phillips, Father Edmund Sylvia One of the most fascinating and most investigated relics is the Sh…-377 View Video
- The Shroud of Turin Research Project, Pt 1 SEPTEMBER 11, 2012: (Program 10351) Guests: Dr. J. Wayne Phillips, Father Edmund Sylvia In May, 2010, Pope Benedict the XVII made pilgrimage to Turin, Ita…-378 View Video
- Carbon Dating and Image Formation: Science and the Shroud, Part 2 SEPTEMBER 12, 2012: (Program 10352) Guests: Dr. J. Wayne Phillips, Father Edmund Sylvia Occasionally in the pursuit of scientific investigation, contradic…-379 View Video
- New Discoveries, New Theories: Science and the Shroud, Part 3 SEPTEMBER 13, 2012: (Program 10353) Guests: Dr. J. Wayne Phillips, Father Edmund Sylvia Science and reason are not antithetical to belief and faith. In fa…-380 View Video
- Dynamic Duo: The Sudarium and the Shroud SEPTEMBER 14, 2012: (Program 10354) Guests: Dr. J. Wayne Phillips, Father Edmund Sylvia Conduct just about any kind of an investigation and nothing is mor…-381 View Video
A MUST READ: Michael Redux: Quantum mechanics, consciousness and love by my friend and this blog’s regular reader and frequent commenter John Klotz:
The question of whether human consciousness is a distinct phenomenon that survives death, is at the core of most religious belief. Now, it is becoming a scientific issue as well. Science is dealing with two related phenomena: the existence of human consciousness and the nature of existence of all matter at the quantum level. Science in attempting to explain human consciousness is science attempting to define the soul. Is our consciousness a discreet process that may operate independent of space and time? Or, is it only an accumulation of sensations that ends when the individual dies and the brain is rendered inert and decaying? Can our consciousness operate independent of time and space? Is there any scientific basis for eternal life? Is the Resurrection real?
AND A MUST WATCH VIDEO: John directs us to a helpful presentation:
Two scientists, Roger Penrose and Stuart Hameroff have advanced a theory that answers some of those questions and indicates, that contrary to the militant atheism now rampant in our culture and science, survival of consciousness after death is an attainable scientific proposition. Hameroff appeared on “Through the Worm Hole,” a scientific series of the Discover Channel hosted by Morgan Freeman. You can view his presentation at http://vimeo.com/39982578.
(That is the six minute version of the presentation. There is a longer version that runs 43 minutes at YouTube)
Now go read John’s complete essay Michael Redux: Quantum mechanics, consciousness and love
Joe Marino sent this along. It is really worth watching. The description reads:
Prepared for the 2011-12 NCFCA/Stoa speech season. This speech placed 1st at the NB 500, 1st at the Venture Qualifier, and 2nd at the Irving Classic. But more importantly, it explains one of the many interesting facts about the the Christian faith not included within the Bible. Enjoy!
Top Documentary Stream has a good write up on The History Channel’s “Jesus: the Lost 40 days.” There is also a link to watch the entire video online.
Released in 2011, “Jesus: the Lost 40 days” is a part of History Channel’s award winning series of documentaries on religious history. This film is written by John Marks and directed by Trey Nelson, the film is an interesting study in to the final days after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christians believe that Jesus was crucified on the cross, he was then resurrected by God so he could make appearances in front of the common people and give them solace.
The documentary also shows Rey Downing’s virtual model of Jesus Christ’s body. Downing has been researching the infamous Shroud of Turin, which is widely believed to be the cloth that wrapped the body of Christ after crucifixion. Using latest computer generated imagery, Downing is able to decipher the underlying image embedded in the cloth, and then generate a three dimensional image of his face.
I bought the video as a downloaded file from Amazon and watched it on a larger screen TV. It is also available on Apple iTunes for iPads, etc.
A frequent, well informed reader of this blog writes:
Your posting of 17 July, "Paper Chase: All Sorts of Papers" revealed a veritable goldmine, and as at 27 July had resulted in what must be a near-record number of 116 comments. Many of these are taken up with a running dialogue (battle?) between Max Patrick Hamon and Yannick Clement, on the Sindon = Mandylion hypothesis.
At comment #85, reference is made to John Jackson’s work on searching for fold mark residuals, and it seems that some were not persuaded by his presentation. I found a set of videos on a "videola uk" site where Jackson presents his argument. I was unable to find a date for the video, and possibly you may have posted it previously. However I thought it worth a mention, so that blog readers may be able to judge for themselves.
The page also give several links to other important topics, including the pollen residues and other topics.
The first video is a summary, and the rest give a more detailed exposition. I felt that Jackson’s presentation might have made more of a case than he actually managed to do, and some of his message gets lost in unnecessary technical details.
The raking light showed up several wrinkles which Jackson says are caused by rolling up with the backing cloth. But a genuine fold residual can be identified by 1) the fold mark extends across the full width of the cloth, 2) the regularity or periodicity of the equal spacings of the marks (generally at the one-eighth points).
He seemed unable to identify some of the frontal image folds, and attributes this to some kind of weighted rod attached to the foot of the sindon, for purposes of exhibiting it in the form observed by Robert de Clari. This may have resulted in eliminating this fold mark. He also identified four closely spaced folds near the feet of the image, and attempts an explanation of these.
You may like to consider whether this is worth a posting.
It is certainly worth posting. You can also click here or on the picture.
You will need a couple of cups of strong coffee . . . no actually something stronger while you watch this video just uploaded July 4, 2012 by GoodShepard007.
The description begins:
This is the MOST BIZARRE, ENTERTAINING AND INFORMATIVE Shroud of Turin Video Ever Presented on youtube or any other place in the world.
Bizarre? Yes! Entertaining? Hmm! Informative? Ouch! Is it the music? The scrambled “facts?” Oh, well, read some more of the description. Then watch it. Or not.
Description from YouTube continues:
THIS IS A ABSOLUTE MUST SEE FOR ANY PERSON THAT WANTS TO KNOW
1. What Happened To The Body of Jesus?
2. Who Is The Man In The Shroud?
There is evidence presented in this video NEVER SEEN BEFORE IN ANY BOOK, VIDEO OR HEARD FROM ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER that is absolutely astonishing.
This is a courtroom style/closing argument type presentation,
During the course of presenting THE VISUAL AND AUDITORY evidence the scale slowly tips in favor of the defendent until it can go no further and the viewer is backed into a corner and there is only 1 possibility left.
The Man In The Shroud is Jesus of Nazareth,
The Greek Word Paul of Tarsus Uses (φαιλόνην) In 2 Timothy 4:13 is a dual feminine noun used in ancient Greek, he altered the spelling by adding a "v" to the end of the word signifying that the word was meant to include both meanings of the word.
The Greek Word φαιλόνην) Has Has Several Meanings
1. Cloak/Garment Wide, Upper or Royal or From Above
2. Light Bringing and LIght Giving (Ilimuinated)
It is derived from the Greek Word that means LIGHT and or GARMENT "something that shines" Paul of Tarsus meant the word to INCLUDE ALL THE MEANINGS.
This is no ORDINARY CLOAK HE IS REFERRING TO, IT IS THE SHROUD OF TURIN.
the pollens samples on the shroud match his foosteps and the fresco paintings on the walls found in the tomb in Rome used the face of the Shroud as a model.
High Grade Myrrh is light reflective and glossy when it dries and would appear to "shine" under light. The image that makes up the Shroud is MYRRH RESIN.
That has been positively identified as making up the shroud image. There is no mistake about. A 100% mathematical certainty.
These are all the properties make up the shroud image
7. Gluceronic Acid (Also a component of polysaccharide and bilirubin)
THESE ARE ALL PROPERTIES OF MYRRH RESIN. DO THE MATH!
This evidence also explains why there is no image around the eyes, navel, between legs AND All places where the cloth did not make direct contact with the body, where myrrh was not applied.
Especially in the blank image around the eyes. This is a place where the myrrh would not have been applied and there is no image except for the faint markings of coins issued by Pilate.
Without the myrrh making contact with the cloth this area would appear blank, just as it does on The Shoud negative image and dark on the positive. You can clearly see where the 3-D Mold of Jesus was not 100% perfect.
This was originally a 60 minute video, I could have GONE ON with more "coincidences" that link this cloth to Jesus of Nazareth ALL DAY LONG. You are seeing only a fragment of this evidence.
The calculated odds the "Man In The Shroud" is someone other than the defendent, Jesus of Nazareth is one in several billion. Stronger than any DNA Evidence ever presented that would easily result in convicting a criminal or setting someone FREE who has been FALSELY ACCUSED.
The best part of this video is that the viewer ALONG WITH THE DEFENDENT is BEING SET FREE
May The Spirit And Power Of Love Eternal Be Yours Now,
See Film School Blog – The Night of the Shroud. The posting is for the June 11 screening at the Universal Studios campus:
New York Film Academy graduate Francesca Saracino’s film, The Night of the Shroud, recently won Best Documentary, Best Director, and Best Visual Effects at the Los Angeles Movie Awards. The controversial documentary investigates the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, a centuries-old linen cloth that bears the image of a crucified man, believed by some to be the cloth in which Jesus was buried. The investigation is hosted by Italian actress Rosalinda Celentano, known for her role as Satan in Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. It uncovers previously unseen research papers, audio files, videos, and correspondence from researchers, cardinals, and Pope Benedict XVI. Francesca Saracino will visit the Universal Studios campus on Monday, June 11, for a screening.
The free event is open to all students, staff, and alumni in Welles at 7 p.m.
I have not seen any coverage of the opening in Jersey City on the 4th of June. Does anyone know someone who attended. I was unable to do so.