Nicely Summarized, Colin

image“That’s really all I have to say to Charles Freeman,” writes Colin Berry after saying quite a bit HERE IN HIS BLOG, starting about two-fifths of the way down the page (scan for, “Let’s return …”),

“except for this:”

some of us have spent the best part of 3-4 years, attempting to fit together the pieces of the ‘Shroud’ jigsaw puzzle – scientific, historical and biblical, to form a coherent and credible whole. Charles Freeman appears not to understand that there is a jigsaw puzzle, or if he does, has contemptuously kicked it aside in his oh-so-condescending magazine piece that tells the world it was ‘just another painting’ , which conveniently for him has somehow managed to lose ALL chemical traces of its pigment leaving us scientists dottily obsessed and spellbound by a mere ‘shadow image’ (undefined except, that is, for its curious and unique set of properties – negative but non-photographic image, 3D properties, ultra-superficial, easily detachable, half-tone character, diimide-bleachable, etc etc). Taking a celebrated line from "1066 And All That" I personally would rather be seen as "Right but Repulsive" than "Wrong but Romantic".

Nicely said, Colin. No, really, I mean it. Sorry to have to say so in the black hole. I tried to say it on your site but I showed up as “Unknown.”

4 thoughts on “Nicely Summarized, Colin”

  1. Colin has the vehemence and righteousness of a recent convert. Maybe he should re think his scorch hypothesis under the light of the listed properties.

    “I personally would rather be seen as “Right but Repulsive” than “Wrong but Romantic”.”

    What about “Wrong and Repulsive”?

  2. Thank you for looking in on my site last night Dan. Sorry I did not recognize you under the new mysterious monicker. Thanks also for this appreciative posting, even if its sentiments and mine are not universally admired in this neck of the woods.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: