From Religion News Service
Our faith is built on forgiveness. If there is no forgiveness, there will be no peace.
–The Rev. Ramadan Chan Liol,
General Secretary of the Sudan Council of Churches
. . . while urging residents of southern Sudan to forgive the north for atrocities committed during a 21-year civil war. He was quoted by Ecumenical News International.
Religion News Service
I know that I’ve already plugged this. But Russ is such an expert on the Shroud and a good presenter as well, I ‘m plugging his upcoming talk at The Summit Church in Fayetteville. Besides, Russ is a good friend. From The Citizen:
Shroud Encounter, a highly acclaimed 90-minute multi-media presentation, is coming to The Summit Church on Sunday, Feb. 13 at 7 p.m. The presentation is free and open to the public.
Shroud Encounter is a production of Shroud of Turin Education Project, Inc. and will be presented by renowned international expert Russ Breault. The presentation is a fast moving, big-screen experience using over 150 images covering all aspects of Shroud research.
Breault has been featured in several national documentaries including “Mysteries of the Ancient World” on CBS and most recently “The Real Face of Jesus?” on the History Channel. He has presented at numerous colleges and universities including Duke, West Point, Auburn and many others. See ShroudEncounter.com for more information.
The Shroud of Turin is the most analyzed artifact in the world, yet still remains a mystery. The 14-foot long linen cloth has been in Turin, Italy for over 400 years and bears the faint front and back image of a 5’10” bearded, crucified man with apparent wounds and bloodstains that match the crucifixion account as recorded in the Bible. Millions of people over the centuries have believed it be the actual burial shroud of Jesus.The mystery continues. National Geographic called it “One of the most perplexing enigmas of modern times.”
Shroud Encounter will cover all aspects of the history, science, art and theories of how the image may have been formed.
The Summit Church is at 1373 Ga. Hwy. 92 S., Fayetteville. For info, call 770-460-3335 or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Shroud of Turin presentation coming to Fayette’s Summit | The Citizen
In this preview of Thursday’s "Piers Morgan Tonight," featuring Kim and Kourtney Kardashian, the subject of money gives way to a conversation about giving.
When Piers Morgan asks how much Kim is worth, she says, "Whatever it is, I give 10% away to the church and that’s what I was taught. Every year, absolutely."
But does Kourtney?
"I’m going to now," Kourtney said. "I was taught that too but I forgot about it."
Kim said she has given millions of her money to the Dream Foundation, as well as tithing to a church her mother created in Calabasas, CA.
Kim Kardashian gives 10% of her money to church and charity – CNN Belief Blog – CNN.com Blogs
From the History Channel site:
- The Real Face of Jesus?:
- Tuesday, Jan 25, 2/1c
You can also buy this video about the Shroud of Turin at Amazon.com.
The Real Face of Jesus? — Episode Guide Episode Guide — History.com
Cazab, in a comment to the previous post, writes, “In fact, it looks like the face(s) on the Veil of Manoppello…”
What do you think? (Left to right: Shroud of Turin, Veil of Manappello, Templecombe)
And Templar Forum (Tony McMahon) responds to my comment that I don’t think Templecombe looks much like the face of the TSM (insider talk for Turin Shroud Man):
I agree – I think the face looks more eastern than the rather Germanic looking face on the Turin Shroud.
You know I am going to have to respond to that after a cup of coffee.
Tony McMahon is writing a book on the Knights Templar. “No Holy Grail. No weird initiation rituals,” he writes. “The story is amazing enough without all that bull. So join me while I lift the lid on the Order of the Temple.”
Good. Look forward to more.
As for the Templecombe image, he writes:
I’m not convinced it looks like the Turin Shroud but it’s very striking. Jesus has ashen features and large, lifeless eyes.
I’m also not sure the Templecombe face looks like the Shroud of Turin.
Interesting site if you are interested in the Templars. Proof of a Templar link to the Turin Shroud? « Knights Templar Forum
Rapper Lil Wayne telling Rolling Stone about reading the Bible while in prison:
I liked the parts where some character was once this, but he ended up being that. Like he’d be dissing Jesus, and then he ends up being a saint. That was cool.
Would that be St. Paul?
Watch this until the structure is rotated. At that point you will see how your eyes have been deceived. The banding or background variegation in the Shroud’s fabric comes to mind; how it makes the man, whose image is portrayed on the cloth, look gaunt, with features that some say are Western European. We must guard against such deceptions.
A reader writes:
I notice that you give no voice to alternate theories about why the carbon dating is wrong. I am particularly interested in John Jackson’s theory that carbon monoxide contaminated the shroud thus increasing the c14 content. I hope you will discuss this in the future.
I’m happy to entertain any arguments and will entertain guest postings that offer substantive arguments. So far, I have heard of many hypotheses but have not seen substantive arguments in support of any of them. Even so, it seems unlikely that they would negate the overwhelming evidence that what was tested was a materially intruded sample created by mending thread: the invisible reweaving theory.
As for Jackson’s (pictured with his wife Rebecca in a Catholic News Agency photograph) hypothesis the only meaningful commentary I have seen, other than what Jackson has written, argues against it. Christopher Ramsey, the head of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit has written:
[T]here are also a number of reasons to think that carbon monoxide contamination is not likely to have had a significant effect. . . . So far the [=experimental] linen samples have been subjected to normal conditions (but with very high concentrations of carbon monoxide). These initial tests show no significant reaction – even though the sensitivity of the measurements is sufficient to detect contamination that would offset the age by less than a single year. This is to be expected and essentially confirms why this sort of contamination has not been considered a serious issue before.
Keep in mind that Ramsey has also written:
There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the Shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow and so further research is certainly needed. It is important that we continue to test the accuracy of the original radiocarbon tests as we are already doing. It is equally important that experts assess and reinterpret some of the other evidence. Only by doing this will people be able to arrive at a coherent history of the Shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information.
I would love to explore this subject more. Send arguments, citations, literature. For now, you, the reader, may want to read A New Radiocarbon Hypothesis by John Jackson.
A Must Read for those wondering about the invisible reweaving repair to the Shroud of Turin:
Counter-Inquiry on the Holy Shroud
by Maria Grazia Siliato
Another explanation for the error of dating was proposed by the Italian archaeologist Maria-Grazia Siliato: the area chosen for the samples, often handled, could be damaged then restored with such a care that this point would be unnoticed by the experts.
In French and English
I’ve added a new dedication page. Just click on the tab near the top of the page.
Kim inspired me to become involved with the study of the Shroud of Turin. He engaged me in conversations with wonderful friends like Dan Scavone. If I keep naming others I’ll leave someone out.
A comment to an article at Wired.com
I have blind faith in science, no matter how far fetched it gets. Infinite parallel universes is perfectly believable. The concept of God however is a step too far as I cant prove it mathematically.
Here are a couple of paragraphs:
In the weird world of quantum physics, two linked particles can share a single fate, even when they’re miles apart.
Now, two physicists have mathematically described how this spooky effect, called entanglement, could also bind particles across time.
Go read the entire article. This is exciting stuff: Quantum Entanglement Could Stretch Across Time | Wired Science | Wired.com
domenico significantly points out:
Arizona laboratory had four pieces wich weighed: 12.39, 14.72, 11.83 and 13.86.
Let’s remember that Donahue writing to Fr. Bonnet Eymard gave the weight of 14.27 instead of 14.72.
This is important because it shows that the weights provided by Prof. Van Haelst on page 5 of the paper “RADIOCARBON DATING THE SHROUD OF TURIN THE NATURE REPORT” (http://www.shroud.com/vanhels5.pdf) were the right ones and they came directly from the Laboratory..
But Prof. Van Haelst writes also that those weights were taken after the cleaning procedure by Dr. Toolin.
Is this information also from the Laboratory? is it correct? or this is one of the many inaccuracies given by the Laboratory?
And Gwen from Alabama sends along a copy of a Donahue letter to Claude Colntet. These weights are corrected in pen and ink revisions.
Click on the image to see a larger size of it. UPDATED: There is a larger size at:
Jull should be providing information about the facts of the 1988 carbon dating rather than a testimony of what he doesn’t see in a sample of unclear provenance and evidence chain. I’m not implying anything except shared public confusion by saying this.
David Mo writes by way of a comment: “Someone could give me a bibliography on “French Weaving”? A bibliography outside the Sindonology, please. I know well the work of Marino, Benford and Prior, but I do not know what are their bases on this issue.Thank you.
domenico replies “look at this technical book about French reweaving :
Thanks, I didn’t know about that book. Since it is at Shroud University, we should all thank Russ Breault for making it available.
Joe Marino writes:
Radiocarbon is a peer-reviewed journal but Jull is indeed the editor, so if there was peer-review, one has to wonder how rigorous it would have been. This is very similar to the late Dr. Walter McCrone’s peer-reviewed journal “The Microscope.” He published one or two Shroud articles in there, but that was literally his own journal, so once again, one has to wonder about the rigor of any article written by a principal of the journal. The circumstances of Jull’s article, much like the Arizona samples, will likely remain murky. (I was not even tempted to say “will likely remain shrouded in mystery.)
This is in reference to the posting, Mark Oxley’s Paper is a Must Read
This is the lede and an the entire story. Be sure not to miss the last paragraph and particularly the last ten words, which I have emphasized in bold font:
The Earth could find itself with a ‘second sun’ for a period of weeks later this year when one of the night sky’s most luminous stars explodes, scientists have claimed.
The supernova could provide the biggest light show since Earth was formed, and will be so bright that night will become like day for one or two weeks, experts said.
Betelgeuse, which is part of the Orion constellation 640 light years away from Earth, is a red supergiant, meaning that it is nearing the end of its life and is due to explode.
When it does do, it will burn so brightly that the earth will appear to have two suns in the sky, the Daily Mail reported.
What is less certain is when it will explode.
Brad Carter, senior lecturer of physics at the University of southern Queensland in Australia, said the explosion could take place before the end of the year – or indeed at any point over the next million years.
You get a clue from this as to why so many people believe so many strange things about the Shroud of Turin thanks to vacuous, sensationalistic journalism.
‘Second sun’ on its way – Telegraph
A reader from Guam wrote:
Timothy Jull threw a curve ball and Mark Oxley hit it out of the park.
New information from Barrie’s site:
Ever since the program first aired, Studio Macbeth (and even this website) have been inundated with requests from viewers all over the world who wanted to obtain prints of the Face of Jesus as depicted in the program. The good news is that those prints are now available directly from the Studio Macbeth website on the "Our Store" page at http://raydowning.com/our-store/. Congratulations are also in order to Ray and his team for winning an Emmy award for bringing Abraham Lincoln back to life on the History Channel special "Stealing Lincoln’s Body." In fact, prints of Lincoln will also be available on their website in the near future.
For instance this image is $45.00.
In response to this very important quotation of Dr. John Tyrer provided by Maria da Glória Gonçalves Barroso of the Centro Português de Sindonologia:
There is therefore some doubt as to wheter the sample described by Professor Raes as Piece II is the edging strip or part of a patch.IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS MATTER BE RESOLVED IF IT IS INTENDED THAT THE FORTHCOMING CARBONDATING TESTS ARE TO BE MADE ON RAES SAMPLE.THE PATCH IS PROBABLY MEDIEVAL. (Caps not mine)
It’s amusing to recall that Jull writes in his recent paper: “an excellent objective technical description of the shroud, its possible origins and weaving technologies, is given by Tyrer (1981).”
Indeed it is very amusing. domenico also provides a valuable link:
A reader writes:
The best thing about Timothy Jull’s article in Radiocarbon is that without it we would not have the benefits of Mark Oxley’s comprehensive response. Mark’s criticism is one of the best recent papers to appear on Barrie’s web site.
Are we sure that Jull’s article in Radiocarbon is peer-reviewed? Jull is the editor, is he not? Does he pick the peers? Does he review and respond to the peers as the author of his paper or as the editor of the journal? How can Jull’s paper be acceptable to his scientist peers given that it is little more than a fallacious absence-of-evidence apologia?
We all owe Mark our thanks for such an illuminating presentation. We owe Timothy our thanks for reinvigorating the discussions that lead to only one conclusion, the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud was botched.
Mark’s paper, “EVIDENCE IS NOT PROOF: A RESPONSE TO PROF TIMOTHY JULL” is a must read.
Just a short note to let you know that Barrie M. Schwortz, the editor and founder of the Shroud of Turin Education and Research Association, Inc. (STERA) has announced the 15th Anniversary Update to shroud.com. In an email to subscribers, he writes:
Our Anniversary Updates are always large ones and this one is certainly no exception. This update includes the public debut of the STERA, Inc. Image Library page that subscribers were able to preview last month. The page has been enlarged since I first announced it and now includes nearly 300 images.
Also included in this update is news of a recent peer reviewed scientific paper by Prof. Timothy Jull of the University of Arizona that challenges the Shroud’s authenticity and a brilliant response to it by Mark Oxley, author of last year’s excellent book, The Challenge of the Shroud. This article is titled Evidence Is Not Proof: A Response to Prof. Timothy Jull and is a must read for everyone!
Also included is the latest edition of the BSTS Newsletter, updates to the Shroud Speakers Directory and the Links To More Information pages, news of several recent Shroud conferences, two new Shroud books and much more. I think you will find enough new material to keep you busy for quite a while!
First of all, congratulations to my friend, Barrie. Fifteen Internet years is nearly forever. Shroud.com is older and more comprehensive than the vast majority of websites on nearly any subject you can name. Over the years, Barrie has done an outstanding job of keeping the site current with new and important material. It is the single-most comprehensive and objective Shroud of Turin website.
And congratulations to Mark Oxley, whose book is indeed excellent, for his article Evidence Is Not Proof: A Response to Prof. Timothy Jull. It is indeed outstanding.
Much to discuss from this update and the paper in the days ahead.
Also, in reference to the posting, “Joe Marino, Sue Benford and the Carbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin « Shroud of Turin Blog,” Maria da Glória Gonçalves Barroso of the Centro Português de Sindonologia makes a very important point.
I had written:
Material intrusion is a big problem in carbon dating. Students of radiocarbon dating technology are familiar with classic examples. For instance, it is almost impossible to date a sample from a peat bog when it is a mixture of decayed newer plants that grew (materially intruded) into older decayed plant matter. And there is the known problem of dating snails living in an artesian spring in Nevada. They were found to be “27,000 years old” at the moment of death because their shells were formed from existing ancient bicarbonate (materially intruded) that was depleted of much of its carbon 14.
Not only had Benford and Marino provided a theory, if not proof, that the carbon dating of the shroud was invalid because of material intrusion, they provided a new, surely more famous, example of material intrusion for radiocarbon dating education. Call it an instant classic example. But the lesson is bigger than that. Students and practicing scientists of radiocarbon technology need to wonder how so many scientists didn’t anticipate the problem given that there were ample warning signs at the time. . . .
Maria da Glória writes:
This post pointed out an important fact dealing with intrusion material which I can’t help quoting “so many scientists didn’t anticipate the problem given that there were ample warning signs at the time.”
As far as I remember no one mentions Dr. John Tyrer’s advice on that matter, but I think it’s worth remembering.
Dr. John Tyrer a british textile expert published an article on the Shroud in textile journal Textile Horizons December 1981 entitled «Looking at the Shroud of Turin as a Textile» and after analyzing photographs of the Shroud ,just by looking at the place where Raes sample had been taken he stated “There is therefore some doubt as to wheter the sample described by Professor Raes as Piece II is the edging strip or part of a patch.IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THIS MATTER BE RESOLVED IF IT IS INTENDED THAT THE FORTHCOMING CARBONDATING TESTS ARE TO BE MADE ON RAES SAMPLE.THE PATCH IS PROBABLY MEDIEVAL.”
This was written in 1981. Is this the first clue to help invalidate radiocarbon test dating of the Shroud?
I guess radiocarbon labs ignored this advice.
If someone is interested to read it the article is available in http://www.shroud.it scientific articles.
This belongs in any history of the carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin. Thanks for bringing this to our attention.