Home > Event, Science > The Eric Jumper Lecture at Notre Dame: How did it go? Anyone?

The Eric Jumper Lecture at Notre Dame: How did it go? Anyone?

January 31, 2013

I have had three inquiries about the Eric Jumper lecture. Does anyone have any input on how it went? Here is what I posted the other day:

clip_image001If you can be at Notre Dame on January 29th, Professor Eric J. Jumper will be speaking on the Shroud of Turin on from 3:30PM until 5:00PM at the Lower Level Auditorium in Geddes Hall. This sounds great:

Thirty-five years ago an expedition was mounted to examine the Shroud of Turin, take data and samples in an attempt to establish the possibility that the Shroud could be the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. Dr. Jumper was one of two co-directors of that expedition. This presentation will relate the preparation and testing of the Shroud and discuss the specific findings regarding the chemical makeup of the various stains and images on the cloth. C14 dating, performed in the early 1980’s, showed that the samples of the cloth that were analyzed had a Carbon date that placed them in the Middle Ages. Although no conclusive method has been established on the specific mechanism responsible for the cloths images, the presumption has been that the cloth could not be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus. Dr. Jumper’s position, since the time that the C14 dating was made public, is that the Shroud cannot have a first century origin; however, new information has come to light that has introduced some doubt to his previous certainty.

Source: Professor Eric J. Jumper — Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering

</BLOCKQUOTE

Categories: Event, Science
  1. jmarino240
    January 31, 2013 at 12:20 pm

    This is what I heard from Richard:

    ERIC WOULD NOT ALLOW THE TALK TO BE TAPED. THE TALK WAS GEARED TO A GROUP OF STUDENTS. THERE WERE ABOUT 50 OR SO THERE.

    THE TALK WAS CASUAL AND RELAXED, ERIC WAS IN GOOD FORM WITH SOME COMICAL REMARKS AS HE SHOWED IMAGES OF THE 78 STURP STUDY.

    ERIC WAS VERY SPECIFIC IN STATING DURING HIS TALK AND FOLLOWING HIS TALK THAT HE WOULD NOT BE IN ANY FURTHER SHROUD RESEARCH. HIS ONLY CONCESSION WAS THE CHANGE IN HIS THINKING AFTER READING RAY’S PAPER [and the book Wrapped Up in the Shroud: Chronicle of a Passion].

    HE REMINISCED WITH FONDNESS MANY OF THE STURP PEOPLE WITH A BIG SMILE ON HIS FACE. HE WAS SPECIFIC ABOUT THE IMPORTANT WORK OF AL ADLER AND BARRIE SCHWORTZ.

    Joe

    • Gabriel
      February 1, 2013 at 2:54 am

      jmarino240: “HIS ONLY CONCESSION WAS THE CHANGE IN HIS THINKING AFTER READING RAY’S PAPER [and the book Wrapped Up in the Shroud: Chronicle of a Passion]. ”

      Does this mean that he now thinks that the Shroud is authentic?Or simply that supports the chemical mechanism (Maillard) proposed by Rogers to explain the image? Or the point about the medieval reweaving?
      I am really intrigued about the position of the codirector of STURP who along these years has gone so unnoticed (at least for me) and, as we could read in a previous post, considers?/considered? that the Shroud could not be a 1st Century cloth.

      • February 1, 2013 at 7:20 am

        Joe Marino’s book “Wrapped in the Shroud” referenced by Jumper is not about the maillard reaction. It was Sue Benhem and he unraveling the C-14 tests because the repair of the corner from which the C-14 samples were taken.

      • February 1, 2013 at 8:45 am

        correction “Sue Benford”

        My apologies to Joe.

  2. January 31, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    It’s too bad he can’t stick around a bit. When reading the into on what happened with STURP, he displayed a talent for making correct, decisive decisions under many trying circumstances.

    We might ave much to learn from him, but I think of us could say “thank you for what you did.”

    JCK

  3. January 31, 2013 at 10:45 pm

    Thanks Joe. I would love to hear Eric talk about the Shroud. That would be such fun.

  4. Joe Marino
    February 1, 2013 at 6:16 pm

    Richard Orareo elaborated a bit in another email to me: ERIC DID NOT GO INTO ANY INTENTION OF ELABORATING ON HIS NEW POSITION. HE SIMPLY RE-STATED WHAT THE ANNOUNCEMENT SAID ABOUT HIS CHANGE OF POSITION. HE IS SIMPLY LESS RIGID ABOUT THE C 14 RESULTS AND REMAINS CERTAIN OF THE VAPOR DISCHARGE THEORY OF IMAGE FORMATION.

  5. Barbara Kvietkus
    November 19, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    Somewhere I read the Blood of Jesus the Christ is AB. Also Publius Lentulus govenor of Judea wrote to Tiberius Caesar emperor of Rome a wonderful description of Jesus. He has blue eyes.This was found in escavated city written in Aramaic in stone.The last test of the Shroud took a piece of It from where the nuns had repaired the Shroud and made the Shroud appear younger. The carbon dating is off anyway. Eric Jumper was kind enough to write back to me when he was examining the cloth way back in New London, Ct. He really was a doubting Thomas then and hopefully he and other skeptics will wake up. How many “proofs” does God have to give us anyway? God asks for our faith. God bless all who care.

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