The ENEA Report story is now very widespread (and in so many papers and blogs so inaccurately reported). The best, most accurate reporting so far seems to be from Ileana Llorens in The Huffington Post. The story is entitled, Shroud Of Turin, Jesus’ Proposed Burial Cloth, Is Authentic, Italian Study Suggests:
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.
Decades of research on Jesus’ proposed burial cloth have revealed an array of conflicting ideas surrounding the shroud’s authenticity. However, researchers from Italy’s National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development believe their findings undermine previous theories that the shroud was faked in the medieval period, the Telegraph reports. The new claim seems to again be stirring controversy, as many point to previous research to the contrary.
Last year scientists were able to replicate marks on the cloth using highly advanced ultraviolet techniques that weren’t available 2,000 years ago — nor during the medieval times, for that matter.
Research in the 1980s suggests the image was "forged" on the cloth between 1260 and 1390, but scientists have determined the hypothesis was based on testing material from a patch likely used to to repair the cloth after a fire, the BBC reports.
Since the shroud and "all its facets" still cannot be replicated using today’s top-notch technology, researchers suggest it is impossible that the original image could have been created in either period.
However, scientists are willing to point out the flaw in their findings. The Vatican Insider reports:
This inability to repeat (and therefore falsify) the image on the Shroud makes it impossible to formulate a reliable hypothesis on how the impression was made.
The bold emphasis is mine. This is so important. Too many of the stories simply jump to a conclusion that isn’t there.
And despite the fact that Dan point out in bold character, Di Lazarro and his team are going out in the media ! BRAVO !!!
Yannick I think you should understand where that comment that Dan pointed too came from!…Take the link from that article above to the VATICAN INSIDER. I think that article emphasizes more of the details and comments made by DiLazarro et al. I think they were quite open and clear about their study and it’s ramifications or shortcomings.
R
It seems to me that it is others that are blowing this study and it’s scientists comments way out of proportion and ‘supernaturalizing’ it, if that is actually a word lol ;-)
R
Hummm, no so sure about that Ron… Anyway, until they can confirmed their findings by some independent researchers, I think they should avoid any public talk in the media. And even if those findings can be confirmed, there will always be the question of the validity of their linen samples. Personally, I think there’s a clear and simple way that they can verify if their coloration is pretty much like the shroud : they just have to take a sticky tape, put some pressure on their sample and see if they can find some “ghosts” of coloration just like STURP found in their sticky tapes from the Shroud surface (which are particles of coloration that were pulled out by the sticky tapes). If they don’t find anything, then there’s a good probability that their coloration is not the same than the Shroud (chemically speaking) . If they do find ghosts of coloration, then the probability would be higher for a match. But since they didn’t used a linen sample done in the ancient way (with a impurity layer on the surface made of sugars), I seriously doubt that they could find any ghost of coloration in a sticky tape experiment. Anyway, that would be a very good and quite simple test to propose to Di Lazarro and his team.
Good idea Yannick, but I don’t think it would prove much, because as you mentioned, the sample they used was of new linen, so since it is manufactured differently from the ancient linen, we can already ‘suppose’ things would be different on the tape sample and on the linen….they need to use a clone of the ancient linen (as close as feasible) and re-do the experiment, then it may be worth doing your test. But alas we don’t know if 2000 years hasn’t affected the Shroud in other ways also, so there’s another tangent…
R