A New Paper by Paul Maloney

a personal opinion that would not, could not be changed

Joe Marino passes along this important new (July 2014) paper by Paul C, Maloney entitled Walter C. McCrone and the Max Frei Sticky Tapes of 1978: A Background Study.

This is a MUST READ paper if you have any interest in the pollen found on the shroud. The concluding paragraph sums up what I think many of us have come to think about Walter McCrone’s thinking:

We may thus draw the conclusion that Dr. McCrone’s statement, sent to Joe Marino on 9 April, 1998 is a conflation of ideas that formed in Dr. McCrone’s mind over the years. My own reading of Dr. McCrone’s responses to Joe Marino’s e-mails convinces me that even if McCrone had had access to my published study, it would not have changed his mind (as evidenced by McCrone’s terse statement to Joe Marino on 19 April, 1998 (Wrapped up in the Shroud, p. 239)—any more than the large photo-mosaic had any effect on McCrone’s thinking on Saturday, July 23, 1988. Some may prefer to believe that this was dishonesty on McCrone’s part. I prefer to think that this conflated statement ceased to represent the science of the Shroud and had become a personal opinion that would not, could not be changed. To have done so would have meant that McCrone could not “save face” for his stance toward the Shroud developed very early on in his messages to STURP.

Picture:  Paul Mahoney at the 2008 Ohio conference

Anticipating the Conference: Paul Maloney on the Stance of the Feet

Paul Maloney  |  11-Oct-2014  |  6:15-7:15 pm


This paper is about one specific medical study of the position of the feet: that of the late Joseph M. Gambescia, M.D.  Two other previously published views about the stance of the feet on the Turin Shroud will be briefly reviewed.  But this paper will be generally confined to what we may call a "third view".

[ . . . ]

This investigation presents my own personal quest, in two parts, to seek an answer to the question:  Which of the three views of the stance of the feet are most likely to be represented by the data on the Shroud of Turin?  . . . Dr. Gambescia’s views have never before been published in any technical presentation.  This will be the first.

[ . . . ]

. . .  an important test of Dr. Gambescia’s proposal will be: Does it suggest answers to questions about intimate details in the blood markings of the Shroud that remained heretofore unexplained?  This paper will briefly explore that.

Click on the title to read the full abstract. Click here for the conference home page.