Left: the arrow points to a THREAD that is displaying a cut edge, i.e. much needed transverse section. Why the speckled appearance? Right: enlargement, showing that it’s the SCW cores of some but not all individual FIBRES that contain the dense pigment, probably Maillard-derived melanoidin, the latter possibly having penetrated via this investigator’s proposed reticular network of capillary channels existing between the MICROFIBRILS.
If Colin Berry is right, the implications could be staggering. It’s enough, I thought, to warrant waking up this blog for at least one posting. Your comments are, as always, welcome.
I retired from blogging just over three years ago. Until today, I stayed away from this blog and every other Shroud of Turin related website and newsletter.
A few days ago, I decided to jump back in, at least for one posting. That was after getting an email from Dr. Colin Berry. He wanted me to know that he now suspected that the Shroud’s image is not superficial.
… a realization that the supposed ultra-superficiality of the TS body image – pointing we’re told to a supernatural origin – had scarcely a single solid fact to back it up. …No, not on the surface PCW (primary cell wall) but hidden away, out of sight, deep within the microfibril-packed core of the SCW (secondary cell wall). Oh dear: has sindonology got it entirely wrong with its ‘out-of-this-world ultra superficial’ body image?
Colin’s email to me invited me to look at his blog. Colin tried to boil the ocean in his last posting, something that I used to do myself, sometimes. I would do so again, this time in a reply to him. In addition to my reaction to Colin’s non-superficiality grenade, I had three years of pent up thinking to unload. When I realized my reply was too long to be a reasonable blog posting or email, I turned it into a PDF file called,The Resurrection is Just Too Mysterious to Be Described & A Response to Dr. Colin Berry.
Long walks with the dog, away from the blog, gave me the chance to think a lot about the Shroud. Colin and I are closer than I thought we were. It is mostly in the conclusions about the authenticity of the cloth that I disagree with him. I think we are very much in agreement about not finding any basis for an image being created as the result of the Resurrection.
Unlike ordinary photographs or paintings, the Shroud image converted into an undistorted three-dimensional figure, a phenomenon which suggested that the image-forming process acted uniformly through space over the body, front and back, and did not depend on contact of cloth with body at every point.
Unfortunately, that wasn’t true. At an international Shroud of Turin conference in St. Louis in 2014, Joseph Accetta proposed that a photograph of a certain death mask might contain all the information needed in exactly the same way as the image on the Turin Shroud. He was right; Colin did so and confirmed it. That challenged the belief, stemming out of an erroneous assumption that the grayscale values on the Shroud represented cloth-to-body distance or body shape. It was a classic case of an assumption being treated like a fact. See: It is really, really time to rethink what we think about 3D.
Colin is a scientist. If he is wrong about the non-superficiality of the Shroud image he certainly wants to know it. And he wants to know why. And if he’s right he wants you to know. And I want you to know that this might challenge a generation of postulating about how the image was formed.
- Read my letter: The Resurrection is Just Too Mysterious to Be Described & A Response to Dr. Colin Berry
- Also, read Colin’s blog posting at Shroud of Turin Without All The Hype. Comments are certainly welcome there as they are here.