Home > News & Views, Pareidolia, Science > An Excellent Analysis of the Coins-on-the-Eyes Issue

An Excellent Analysis of the Coins-on-the-Eyes Issue

October 27, 2011

imageMUST READ:  Jos Verhulst from Antwerp writes:

. . . The lituus seems to show an horizontal orientation, at variance with the reports by Filas and others.

Note however, that the characters seem to be composed of thread itself; they are not imprinted on the shroud, but they seem to be formed by the woven textile as such. As a matter of fact, it is possible (for instance) to detect al lot of A’s on other parts of the shroud.

So there seems to be some evidence, but it is very weak. . . .

READ THE ENTIRE LETTER:  Be fair to Jos Verhulst and to yourself and read the entire email and look at the large images below the fold by clicking on Read More. This is the best analysis I have seen in many years.

Some months ago,I briefly looked into the problem of the alleged coin
image on the shroud and this is what I found:
(1) My starting point was the booklet by Jean-Philippe Fontanille &
Sheldon Lee Gosline (2001) "The coins of Pontius Pilate" (Warren
Center, Pennsylvania: Shangri La Publicatins).
The authors started from the picture that appeared in "Dossiers
d’Archéologie" nr 249, dec.1999, p.122).
This is the 2/3 Enrie pic made in 1931.
I looked at the same picture as it was printed in "Dossiers
d’Archéologie". This is the eye with the alleged coin, as it is
printed in "Dossiers d’Archéologie":


image


It was rather easy to guess the location of the following details:
(a) circumference of the coin (dark rims):


image


(b) outlne of 4 characters (KAI and A) and part of the lituus


image


The lituus seems to show an horizontal orientation, at variance with
the reports by Filas and others.
Note however, that the characters seem to be composed of thread
itself; they are not imprinted on the shroud, but they seem to be
formed by the woven textile as such. As a matter of fact, it is
possible (for instance) to detect al lot of A’s on other parts of the
shroud.
So there seems to be some evidence, but it is very weak.
(c) some additional evidence is offered by the following picture


image


This picture is taken from the book by Oswald Scheuermann "Turiner
Tuchbild aufgestrahlt? Nachweisversuch" Saarbrücken: Verlag Dr.Mümmer,
p.53.
It is a computer processed picture, with the periodic pattern produced
by the textile structure eliminated with the help of Fourier
techniques (the processing was done at the university of Erlangen,
Germany). There remains no trace of any characters, as was to be
expected. However, the lituus seems to transpire rather clearly, which
is surprising (red arrow). Note again its horizontal position (in
accordance with Fontanille’s and Gosline’s findings, , but not with
the findings by Filas and Whanger).
best wishes
Jos Verhulst, Antwerp

  1. Yannick Clément
    October 27, 2011 at 10:48 am

    I agree that the weaves of the Shroud can rely fool some eyes ! No doubt about that… And it’s because of that that I took position AGAINST the released of the HD images by Turin if it is done without direct test (like chemical test for example) to go along.

  2. October 27, 2011 at 3:02 pm

    You in America discuss whether the lituus is vertical or horizontal. Here in Italy, some sindonologists have seen the lituus as bent to the left, others as bent to the right. I don’t see any lituus at all!
    I have published an article about the coins on the eyes, but it is in Italian. It is here, in case somebody tries to avail of Google Translate:
    http://www.cicap.org/new/articolo.php?id=273767
    (Clic on the figures to enlarge.)

  3. Yannick Clément
    October 27, 2011 at 3:41 pm

    Moral of this story : Some people see what they want to see !!! ;-)

    In his book “A Chemist’s Perspective on the Shroud of Turin”, Ray Rogers talk precisely about that AND I THINK HE WAS RIGHT !

  4. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 27, 2011 at 3:50 pm

    Gian Carlo hai ragione/you’re right. This is a pareidolia (irregularity partly due to a micro-crinkle)

    It was a nice try Jos, though. Try to read the first page of my Torun paper. (the 5 crucial parameters).

    The Shroud material used here is totally biased (3rd or 4th generation copy from an inkjet printed picture from a French publication. Just cant work.

    • Ron
      October 28, 2011 at 6:13 pm

      I cannot say anything to your first two comments, but agree 100% with the last one. Bogus material such as this should not be placed on here.

  5. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 3:19 am

    Matter of fact, the alleged lituus (short curved wand) counter-imprint is just made up of an horizontal micro-crinkle and an irreguar waft thread coated into a inkjet grain clump.

  6. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 5:46 am

    Because CICAP is VERY FEROCIOUS to Shroud researchers. I’ll ask CICAP to do the (paper?)review of the first 10 pages of my Torun paper. I’ll send it to them within a month.
    In reciprocity, I ask all the CICAP specialists to write a paper PROVING THERE IS NO AND JUST CANNOT BE POSITIVELY DETECTED AND IDENTIFIED ANY PILATE COIN. THIS is a fair challenge.

  7. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 5:48 am

    Do please read “(peer?) review” instead of (paper?) review”

  8. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 5:51 am

    CICAP specialists shhould send their paper BEFORE my 10 first pages reach tem.

  9. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 6:17 am

    Don’t you forget, in terms of pareidolia there are FALSE POSITIVES & FALSE NEGATIVES.

    Paolo di Lazzaro and Daniele Murra wrote an intellectually much unfair paper dealing ONLY with false positives. They totally ignored false negatives. Barrie Schwortz applauded.

    At the Frascati conference, they went as far as using a slide of Marion’s detection of ghost writings around the Face just to discredit Marion’s work. Can Paolo di Lazzaro and Daniele Murra read late ancient Greek? I very much doubt so. This was most unfair to late Marion’s memory. He was not there to defend himself. I had to intervene and defend his memory

    This is why, to-day, no one will be able to find the Ghost incription image they presented at the Frascati conference 2010.

  10. Max Patrick Hamon
    October 28, 2011 at 6:24 am

    I must say to Paolo and Daniele’s defence there otherwse really really nice people. Don’t you mistake my viewpoint. Any body can make a mistake. Myself I do lack a sense of diplomacy at times.

  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.
%d bloggers like this: