Originally Posted by
David Mo
Of course, no; I don’t call “science” neither creationism nor sindonism. If you can read Spanish you can visit my blog (
http://sombraenelsudario.wordpress.c...rgio-del-frio/ ) where I have quoted the Larhammar’s and others’ work debunking Kouznetsov. You also can find other studies in that sense (Rinaldi and others) in my small bibliography. I have only pointed out how Dr. Kouznetsov is now trying to pave his own way on the ground of normal science. Knowing our hero’s exploits in the past I’m expectant. To be continued.
Yes there are many fields of woo for him to expand his fraud into...
Thanks for the link. However my Spanish is non-existent.
Originally Posted by
pakeha
I find it intriguing someone would try to present an idea, in this case, the notion there is blood on the shroud of Turin, here without marshalling their facts.
Well he's alleged there is blood on the shroud before, without being able to support it.
Just more of his efforts to avoid dealing with reality.
Originally Posted by
Acleron
Has there been any reliable and verifiable evidence from the shroud pro-antiquity people at all? (That's for any aspect of the shroud)
I'm not sure exactly what you mean, evidence for what in particular? They ignore/distort the radiocarbon evidence, allege blood (unsupported by evidence), allege MidEast pollen (unsupported by evidence) et cetera.