The silence is deafening and revealing?
So said someone on the web page that announced a £20,000 challenge to Richard Dawkins to, “to explain how the Shroud and its image might have come into existence.” All indeed is quiet. That is a blessed relief. Should something become deafening it will be the sound of laughter in countless skeptical blogs. Oh, and so sadly revealing.
An open letter to Richard Dawkins states, “Thanks to the work of Professor Fanti it is now possible to take a scientific approach to such a task. He describes the criteria that must be satisfied to recreate it and it is published in a peer reviewed scientific journal.”
Really?
The list of criteria is published in a paper called “Hypotheses Regarding the Formation of the Body Image on the Turin Shroud. A Critical Compendium.” In the paper the criteria is in the form of a list described by the author as “peculiar characteristics.” The list, some twenty-four items in number, is called, “Table I. List of TS body image (sic) and its relationship with the body that produced it.”
The body that produced it? How can one honestly call the paper a critical compendium?
In reality, the list is a smorgasbord of suppositions and conjectures with a smattering of observations. How can anyone think that the “TS enveloped a dead human body” is an image characteristic. It should be obvious to the most casual reader of the paper that this list of so-called characteristics was assembled with that presumption in mind. In fact, the entire paper, it seems, was written to promote a single hypothesis, that the image was produced by radiation caused almost certainly by an event beyond the realm of science to explore, which involved a corpse wrapped in the shroud.
This is a scientific approach? How in the world did this paper get published in a peer reviewed scientific journal? Is this the work of the Shroud Scientists Group?
How is this consistent with a forthright challenge to a skeptic “to explain how the Shroud and its image might have come into existence?”
Do you support this Dan?
It is called the Shroud Science Group. Not everyone in the group is a scientist. This is not the work of that group. Professor Giulio Fanti, who wrote the paper, is a member of that group. That is widely known. So am I.
Please note that only numbers 1-8 and 14-24 are ‘primarily germane to this challenge.’ Look carefully on the challenge page.) The criterion you quote above is not included. But your point is well taken. As the link to the paper (now outside a pay wall) is passed around from blog to blog, particularly among Atheist and skeptical sites, it will be forgotten that 9-13 are not part of the challenge. That is a problem.
Do I support the challenge? I initially liked the idea but after studying it I cannot support it with the current criteria, which indeed contains many unnecessary interpretations, which you rightly call supposition and conjecture. For example, item 23 reads, “Bloodstains appear on and outside the body image, indicating that some blood drained from the corpse to the fabric.” The first part of the sentence, up to the coma, is a legitimate observation. The rest of the sentence is supposition. I think it’s reasonable, even probably true, but it is nonetheless supposition. So in answer to your question, a new list must be prepared before I can support the challenge.
The Challenge Page at Shroud Enigma
Thoughts on this from readers will be particularly welcome? How do you feel about the challenge? Should the criteria be revised? Am I wrong?
I think if the objective is to start a scientific discussion on the Shroud definitively, this is not the way. No serious researcher from the academia will accept this challenge for many reasons, but I would like to highlight the most important ones:
1. Scientific discussions should be taken to scientific forums. In year 2012, the main forums are peer-reviewed JCR journlas.
2. Scientific analysis must always be independently confirmed and to that purpose, free access to available material and proofs must be made readily available for any researcher. Obviously this is not the situation (please read below why this might be so) for the Shroud.
3. Any serious research group with a solid career in science would a priori understand that it is precisely the poor professional & scientific profile of the promoters which makes them impossible to take the discussion to a truly scientific forum AND FOR THIS REASON, they want to involve high level scientists in a confrontation with the rules of internet &media discussions, completely different from truly scientific discussion. In other words, they will never be dragged into such a playground where Shroud stars so at ease and confortable feel, something that we have seen along these years.
For this reason, I think that if anyone is to be attracted to this challenge will be people from outside the academia or science environment. In this case, we can expect a new cycle of poor rigorous discussions on TV talk shows and the whole stuff.
If that is what the promoters want, OK! go ahead…..but put yourselves in the shoes of the Church who keeps the Shroud. How on earth are they going to allow any new test in this context?
I have the feeling that this has been happening since the STURP experiment and if I were the Church -who ALWAYS gets very high quality scientific advise- I would have started my own research with my very qualified resources. Far from ENEA reports, Easter and Christmas best-sellers and £20000 challenges.
why do scientists have to enter the discussion at all? if this is a 14th century man made artifact i don’t believe a phd was involved. so most any modern era person should be able to turn out a shroud in a month or two tops. if you think this is sarcasm you are correct
Gabriel, why do you think there was no other real external scientific examination since the STURP ? ;-) I have said it before and I’ll said it again : When it comes to anything involving Jesus (especially the Shroud of Turin), there’s too many wacos out there ! And don’t worry, I’m sure the Vatican are fully aware of the crazyness surrounding the Shroud these days and they also know very well who are those wacos pretending to do good science… That’s why I think we’ll wait for a long time until new series of direct tests will be hallowed. I’m not even sure I’ll see this in my lifetime. As they always say : The time of the Church is not the time of the World ! And you know what I think ? It’s a very good thing ! :-)
The message of Pope Benedict XVI on research on the Turin Shroud was read by Bishop Kevin Vann of Forth Worth, Texas at the last Shroud congress held in Dallas. Benedict is German, highly intelligent and can be blunt-spoken, and he was very clear in what his message meant. If no one seems to listen, that it is a different matter, but then who can complain?
I agree, Yannick……… I would add that if we look at how things have evolved since the 80’s, from an objective point of view one of the very few players in this match which emerges after all these years as having shown a coherent and rational position is the Catholic Church. I also agree that this is also due to her particular long-term view of History, and from this perspective, her widely criticized lack of action and silences (why not more tests? do they have anything to hide? have been common places, even in many comments of this blog) during the last years seem to me now as the most inteligent answer to the never ending show the Shroud has become.
I agree completely with you. If the Church was like many person on this blog and others in the Shroud world, they would used the Shroud like a banner to convert people ! And that would be the greatest mistake they could ever make. Christian faith is not supposed to rest on a piece of cloth (no matter how special it is) but on a living person : Jesus-Christ ! Sorry but the Shroud IS NOT Jesus. It is a sign that points in his direction, that’s all.
I see things in a slightly different light. I think it is the fault of the church that things are the way they are today in the Shroud world. Why? Restricted access, sure they allowed the ’78 study but then refused the ’88 study that would have brought much much more light to many things concerning the Shroud….WHY restrict? it would have been done with the professionalism as the ’78 study. Then even though they were warned about the complications/issues of c14 dating they still allowed it, but then at the very last minute changed the protocol basically dooming any proper c14 testing to occur (Which we’re still suffering today) Since then they have not allowed much scientific investigation into the Shroud except to a few ‘insiders’. Then to top things off, they do the 2002 ‘restoration’, maybe making it impossible to ever find the truth…I am really disgusted by the way the custodians of the Shroud and the Vatican (as the buck stops there) have acted since the ’78 study. People can say what they want to defend these people but a thorough study of what really happened in the past speaks for itself. Seriously, if this Shroud is the Shroud of Christ it was placed here by God himself and whom has ‘ownership’ of this then ‘truly’….ALL DO. I’m sure in my heart these people responisible for all this Shroud fiasco will have many questions to answer when they meet their maker.
R
Quote : I’m sure in my heart these people responisible for all this Shroud fiasco will have many questions to answer when they meet their maker.
Sorry Ron, but I think you didn’t understand the message of the gospel. Hearing you, it’s like you turn the good news (that’s what Gospel mean) into a very bad one !!!
I recommand you to read again the parable of the prodigal son and you’ll see that the “maker” doen’t ask anything of us except our love.
I would just add one thing to my last comment : If God would be like Ron think he is, I wouldn’t be interested by this kind of God at all ! A judge from the supreme court ? Very little for me !!! God is love my friends ! Why is it so hard to understand and believe ? We have the Shroud as the best “proof” of that !!! In fact, the Shroud have a very great message for us : God doesn’t judge any of his children. Instead, it is his children who judged him 2000 years ago and who still judge him today… I don’t want to start a theological debate, but I just don’t understand why there’s still plenty of good Christians who still think of God as the God of Talion, while we have plenty of examples in the Gospels that he is the God of Love. And the very best example is what we just celebrate one week ago, namely the Passion, death and resurrection of Jesus-Christ. And, like I said, the Shroud is just the very best sign that God is not the one of Talion but, on the contrary, is the God of Love, and nothing else. That’s what I know deep down in my heart. Ok, now I shut my mouth because I’ve said what I wanted to say and I let you believe what you want to believe ! Freedom of faith is important. In fact, it is another sign of Love ! ;-)
So you think God accepts everyone? Then why commandments? Why does he need us to believe in him? What is hell for then? I think it is you who needs to reread your bible, and pay special attention to the words spoken by Jesus. Remember the people of the Church have a higher calling then we do, just because of the positions they hold and a higher expectation from God. That is what I get from his words. Also my stating they would have questions to answer, was basically that. They may be asked why they held his works from his children…Not that he would cast them to the depths of hell, but he may not be too happy with their actions…understand?
R
That’s your point of view Ron. Just a question : Did Jesus reject somebody in the Gospels ?
I’m not sure Yannick. That would require me to read thru the NT completely looking specifically for that particular thing. But I can say with utmost confidence Jesus ‘spoke’ of it many many times. Will you argue against Jesus’s words then?
R
Wow Ron. The way you see God look greatly like the way the Jews saw God in the Old testament. If you think Jesus reject someone, you must have a great fear of God then, because, in all logic, he could reject you ! If that’s your God, keep it, I don’t want it ! And I say this with all respect… It’s just simply that I don’t believe in this God of Talion.
Read again the Gospels and you’ll se that Jesus never reject anyone. That’s precisely what makes him God !!! If God would reject even only one of his children, he would be just like us and not God anymore. As I said before : with Jesus or the Father, from the moment you take out the concept that God is Love (and only this), you’re off-track. I really believe this. Jesus was tough with the Jewish leaders, yes, but it was a tough love ! He never said to one of them : You’ll be in hell ! He just wanted to wake them up and change their heart of stone in a heart of flesh…
I recommand you to look even more than you’ve ever did at the Shroud and you’ll see that God is love and nothing else. That’s precisely THE good news (gospel) !!!! If someone end up in hell one day, that will be because HE will CHOOSE it freely. That will never be because God would reject him. On the contrary, that would be because he would reject God. Completely the opposite !
But this scenario is purely hypothetic… Personally, I have a great difficulty to believe that one person can reject God completely and forever when he will be face with Love in person ! And this is exacly the view of the catholic Church : They NEVER proclaim that there’s even one single person in hell (not even Hitler or Judas or anyone else), while they never had fear of proclaiming, over the centuries, that thousands of people were in Heaven (the Blessed and the Saints) !!! Why ? Simply because we (the humans) have no right to judge what is the lenght of the Mercy of God !
Read again the parable of the Prodigal Son and right after, look at the Shroud ! I hope this could help you to see the Truth. God is a Father (not a judge) and he is Love ! And he love us to the point that he died for the worthless that we all are !!!! I’ll say it again : that’s the good news of Jesus-Christ ! Don’t search for another news that this one… In fact, that’s the revolutionary message of Jesus. So revolutionary in fact that he made himself a ton of ennemies that simply cannot take it.
I hope one day you’ll be able to see the Truth Ron. I really do. Because then, you’ll understand that if God love you to the point that he died for you, it is also true for everyone ! No one is exclude ! I think, as Christians, we should all hope for the universal salvation of every child of God, no matter the things he did in his life. I believe that the Mercy of God is much greater than the worst thing a human can do. I truly believe this because that’s what I experiment in my heart. And when I look at the Shroud, it just confirm to me that what I experiment one day was not a dream… That was true !
Peace to you ! Shalom, like they say in hebrew ! :-) God is Love, can you find me a better news that this one ??? Personally, I can’t !
“I hope some day you’ll be able to see the truth Ron” ….LOL …and I suppose you are telling me you know the truth? …I just bust my gut here laughing.
Ron