Home > Other Blogs, Science > Put that in your pipe, Luigi Garlaschelli, and smoke it

Put that in your pipe, Luigi Garlaschelli, and smoke it

October 8, 2014

imageA reader from Tel Aviv writes:

. . .  I nominate Colin Berry as the best, most qualified, most creative scientist skeptic in the history of the shroud.

I agree. Put that in your pipe, Luigi Garlaschelli, and smoke it.  What was the name of that Chuck Berry song? “Roll Over McCrone”?  No, Joe Nickell only wears a white lab coat like all the other PhDs in English Lit.

And I’m thankful for Colin’s work. And I’m enjoying his new explorations in the area of Maillard Reactions using lemon juice and milk.

Now, I’m not saying he isn’t wrong about a lot of things. I think he is.

And he can be something of a junk yard dog at times.

And I still think the shroud is the burial shroud of Christ. Who knows, maybe Colin will prove me wrong some day. Maybe he’ll come around to my way of thinking.

No, that is not a picture of Colin. It is Luigi. For a picture of Colin visit Colin’s About Me page in Blogger

Moreover, I trust Colin. He doesn’t want me to quote the following paragraph from his very public blog. But it says a lot, so let him be pissed. It is one reason why I trust him:

. . . There is no such thing as an expert in the field of sindonology (or shroudology as I prefer to call it. We are all beginners. Some begin better than others. The TS is a test of our ability to separate the wishful thinking that comes with appealing imagery from that of cold hard reality. Sadly there is no part of the human mind that is devoted to detecting CHR. The human mind is programmed to respond on a more immediate like/dislike response to what it sees. It’s part and parcel of the human condition to instantly add layers of fancy to what cunningly or otherwise seduces, or attempts to seduce the eye.

Maybe he’ll come around to my way of thinking? Probably not, but I think he is honest. Thanks, reader, for writing.

  1. October 8, 2014 at 9:14 am

    I don’t really like the term ‘skeptic’ because it implies that such a person is anti-mystery or anti-faith, it also implies that if a person doesn’t self-identify as a ‘skeptic’ they are anti-science and anti-reason. I prefer the word ‘seeker’ because an honest seeker of truth is what we’re all called to be.

  2. October 9, 2014 at 8:05 am

    Interesting, Dan. Has no one who believes the Shroud is authentic ever questioned (was skeptical) about it’s authenticity?

    • Max patrick Hamon
      October 9, 2014 at 10:19 am

      I was till I studied it.

      • Max patrick Hamon
        October 9, 2014 at 10:28 am

        …and found the oversized-Rorschach blood-test-like Holy Shroud just triggered off most in not all the visions and semblances of the Holy Grail in Medieval Arthurian legends and those in The Book of Revelation.

        • Max patrick Hamon
          October 9, 2014 at 10:30 am

          I mean the archaeopareidolia ‘crazy stuff’…

        • Max patrick Hamon
          October 9, 2014 at 5:45 pm

          Typo: the oversized-Rorschach blood-test-like Holy Shroud just triggered off most IF not all the visions and semblances of the Holy Grail

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