[A] veritable pseudoscience has been created. Sindonology. The study of one single relic, isolated from everything else, conducted outside the world of orthodox academia, and often with deep disrespect and distrust for what the orthodox scientists have to say. And when any orthodox scientist reads the endless on-line discussions of these ‘sindonologists’, the papers presented at their conferences, and the occasional publications that they produce, he will invariably notice one thing: these people veritably despise the academic world.
I do think we should forget the word sindonology. Davor helps us see that the word is silly. But is he right that it is studied outside the world of orthodox academia? Well, yes, for the most part, I think so. But when he says “often with deep disrespect and distrust for what the orthodox scientists have to say,” he is wrong. I would be interested in why he thinks that is so.
Just this morning, I read this from Joe Marino. (I didn’t get his permission to quote this email so I hope he doesn’t mind.):
So all the STURP scientists, who were [part of] the US space and nuclear programs and worked for some of the most prestigious institutions in the world, are nothing more than pseudoscientists who don’t even put the Shroud in the context of mainstream science. They despise the academic world even though many had Ph.D.s and published scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals. They distrust "orthodox" scientists, who have done little or no study of the Shroud, and whose opinions should trump the several hundred thousands of hours of analysis done on the cloth. So "orthodox" scientists like Garlaschelli and Tite and Hall should never be doubted about anything, especially the Shroud.