ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags shroud of turin

Closed Thread
Old 11th September 2012, 10:57 AM   #3161
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 16,668
Quote:
4. Effects from the fires that damaged the shroud
I'd think that fire would concentrate C14 if anything. C14 is heavier than C12 or C13, and therefore less energy is necessary to make it fly away.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 12:47 PM   #3162
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
Possible reasons that the Carbon 14 testing was wrong...
A good summary of the possibilities.
I wonder if Jabba will come up with anything not on your list.
__________________
How many zeros? Jabba
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 01:00 PM   #3163
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,856
Originally Posted by pakeha View Post
A good summary of the possibilities.
I wonder if Jabba will come up with anything not on your list.
6. I really really want it to be wrong.
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 01:57 PM   #3164
Filippo Lippi
Illuminator
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,151
7 (as he previously stated) he can imagine someone disproving the dating in the future
__________________
You can't defeat fascism through debate because it's not simply an idea, proposal or theory. It's a fundamentally flawed way of looking at the world. It's a distorting prism, emotionally charged and completely logic-proof. You may as well challenge rabies to a game of Boggle. @ViolettaCrisis
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 01:58 PM   #3165
Monza
Alta Viro
 
Monza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,095
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Well anyway, I think that I have a way you can prove that I'm avoiding the evidence -- if I really am.

- Select a "gatekeeper," rather than a spokesperson, to tell me which specific Q, C or A to try to answer next. Everyone can raise whatever questions and objections they wish -- but, instead of me deciding what to try to answer next, the gatekeeper will decide for me.
- I agree that there are numerous Q/C/A's that have been repeated numerous times -- but again, these are, themselves, numerous. Just tell me which of these to address next...
- I claim that if you go ahead and do that, I'll be slow, but you'll see that I do not try to avoid the evidence. That's exactly what I was trying to show with Dave's list re reweaving -- but then, people kept wanting me to move on to other issues. And if you noticed, in addressing Dave's list, I was admitting that my answers weren't that good... I wasn't giving up, as my task is to present the best Shroud authenticity case I can muster -- and, I do still think that the Shroud probably is authentic.

- Perhaps, instead of electing a gatekeeper, you guys could just talk amongst yourselves and decide "in committee" what you would most like me to address next. Maybe, you could develop a private distribution list for anyone who's interested in helping to direct the conversation. Maybe, someone could just offer him or her self to designate what I should answer next. Maybe, you could take turns in alphabetical order...

- I will still want equal time to direct the conversation myself.

--- Jabba

It's been 11 days and still nothing from you regarding the evidence of the C14 dating being incorrect. I think this proves you are avoiding the evidence.
Monza is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 04:50 PM   #3166
dlorde
Philosopher
 
dlorde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,859
Whatever happened to:

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I am currently trying to gather up links and arguments to refute your claims and further make my case…
- We'll see...
- But, I will be back.

--- Jabba
__________________
Simple probability tells us that we should expect coincidences, and simple psychology tells us that we'll remember the ones we notice...
dlorde is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 07:34 PM   #3167
Pope130
Illuminator
 
Pope130's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,402
Is quoting yourself rude? 25th April, in post number 1188 of this thread:

Originally Posted by Pope130 View Post
Jabba,
Just answer the C14 question.
Still waiting.
Pope130 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 07:52 PM   #3168
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 17,393
Jabba,

I was self-appointed gatekeeper for 30minutes. I also asked you to just answer the 14C question. Still waiting. Does this confirm you are indeed avoiding the question?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 11th September 2012, 09:08 PM   #3169
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
The main problem with the fire hjypothesis is that it needs to bring in about 4 time as much foreign carbon loaded with fresh 14C than original carbon (about 20% original sample with 1st century origin and 80% fresh wood/combustible origin carbon). That is neigh impossible.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th September 2012, 12:24 AM   #3170
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 22,858
Originally Posted by Aepervius View Post
The main problem with the fire hjypothesis is that it needs to bring in about 4 time as much foreign carbon loaded with fresh 14C than original carbon (about 20% original sample with 1st century origin and 80% fresh wood/combustible origin carbon). That is neigh impossible.
Also, since carbon added from a fire is also called soot, such an influx would leave the fabric thoroughly blackened. Which is not what we observe.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th September 2012, 12:39 AM   #3171
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,685
Nobody expects la Tribunal del Santo Oficio de la Inquisición

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I would agree that you have provided some info that supports claims of C14 validity and weakens claims of invalidity, in this particular case -- but then, I disagree that you have provided info that proves C14 validity, or refutes C14 invalidity, in this case.


And yet the Vatican does agree with us.

What do you make of that, Jabba?
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th September 2012, 03:50 AM   #3172
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Also, since carbon added from a fire is also called soot, such an influx would leave the fabric thoroughly blackened. Which is not what we observe.

Hans
It feels like Punxsutawney here, because I remember pushing that argument something like 20 pages ago (and probably somebody pushed it 20 pages before me).
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th September 2012, 04:53 AM   #3173
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,605
Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
Possible reasons that the Carbon 14 testing was wrong:
1. Invisible patch hypothesis
Comment: The invisible hypothesis is the most discussed idea in this thread. The evidence against it is daunting to the point that for any practical purposes it is reasonable to accept that the invisible hypothesis has been proved false.

2. Bioplastic coating
Comment: Roger Sparks, a carbon dating expert from New Zealand, makes very convincing arguments against this possibility here: http://www.shroud.com/c14debat.htm. This is clearly a fringe theory and bioplastic coating is not a recognized source of error for carbon 14 age dating. Even if it bioplastic coating was shown to be a possible source of error for the dating of a fabric the possibility that it could cause anything like the 1300 year error hypothesized for the shroud dating is essentially impossible for the reasons that Sparks outlined in the discussion linked to above.

3. Collusion
Comment: That are many hypothetical permutations of collusion by the people involved in the sampling and testing. All of them seem to be extremely unlikely. For one thing nobody has shown any kind of possible motive. But even if a motive could be theorized the well documented sampling and testing procedures coupled with the use of controls seems to preclude it.

4. Effects from the fires that damaged the shroud
Comment: This is a theory that carbon from the burning migrated into the shroud and perhaps there is a mechanism whereby carbon 14 as opposed to carbon 12 and carbon 13 preferentially migrated into the cloth. Sparks in the link above, argues both that preferential migration of carbon 14 from a fire is not possible and that if there was a problem with carbon 14 dating of samples based on exposure to fires that it would have been noticed by now. Meacham argues that there is very little if any carbon 14 dating that has been done on a sample alleged to have been a first century artifact that had been subjected to a fire in about 1500 AD so no conclusion is possible about the carbon 14 dating on the shroud. The problem, of course, with Meacham's line of argument is that carbon 14 dating might be deemed unreliable in almost any situation because there is always going to be something unique about a sample. No scientifically recognized reason has been put forth as to why the nature of the shroud's history would cause an error remotely in the range of the error hypothesized.

5. Other unknown sources of error for the carbon 14 testing
Comment: The argument here is that there are various known sources of error for carbon 14 testing and maybe not all sources of carbon 14 test errors may be known and with regard to the shroud one of these unknown sources of error has caused a test error.

This at best seems to be a remote possibility. None of the known problems with carbon 14 testing seem to apply here. The known problems include that the source of carbon for marine organisms is not atmospheric, some snails have been shown to incorporate older sources of carbon in their shells, and the use of old carbon sources in the preparation of materials as in the use of asphalt in some of the compounds used by the Egyptians in the creation of the mummies. One thing to note about the problems listed above is that they all have the effect of making a sample test older than it is and with the shroud the opposite problem is hypothesized.
Not to forget that the labs were experienced in sample handling and removal of surface contamination.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 12th September 2012, 08:53 AM   #3174
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
I rather like the collusion hypothesis, myself.
Quote:
3. Collusion
Comment: ...That are many hypothetical permutations of collusion by the people involved in the sampling and testing. All of them seem to be extremely unlikely. For one thing nobody has shown any kind of possible motive. But even if a motive could be theorized the well documented sampling and testing procedures coupled with the use of controls seems to preclude it. ...
Somehow the idea of the Vatican subverting the scientific community, exerting pressure on three different university labs and permitting the sale of items like this:



makes life a little more amusing.
Somehow I see lots of moody shots of the Vatican a là Godfather III, frustrated scientists drinking themselves to early graves from the shame of it all, strident bloggers trying to get the truth out, and the brooding presence of ancient cardinals determined to protect mankind from the dangers of truths we're not prepared for.

If we rule out collusion, what do we have?
Other than the white leather leggings?

Last edited by pakeha; 12th September 2012 at 08:55 AM.
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 04:40 AM   #3175
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Evidence Against Carbon Dating

- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:
The non-image cloth typically shows weak
fluorescence (upper right). When image appears on the
cloth, it quenches the fluorescence and gives it a brown
color (see "Hands" below). The small, triangular, white
area is where the Raes sample was cut in 1973. The
radiocarbon sample was cut upward from there about 1
cm to the right of the seam and about 7 cm long. The
area where the radiocarbon sample was taken is relatively
dark, a fact that is not the result of dirt, image color, or
scorching. The cloth is much less fluorescent in that area,
brightening into more typical fluorescence to the right.
The photograph proves that the radiocarbon area has a
different chemical composition than the main part of the
cloth. This was obviously not considered before the sample was cut.


- Someone in our group claimed, and appeared to show, that there were numerous other places on the Shroud with the same coloring as the C14 sample. Can anyone point me to that claim?

--- Jabba
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 05:04 AM   #3176
Filippo Lippi
Illuminator
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,151
You were asked about the C14 dating.

'Evasion noted'
__________________
You can't defeat fascism through debate because it's not simply an idea, proposal or theory. It's a fundamentally flawed way of looking at the world. It's a distorting prism, emotionally charged and completely logic-proof. You may as well challenge rabies to a game of Boggle. @ViolettaCrisis
Filippo Lippi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 05:11 AM   #3177
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 22,605
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:
The non-image cloth typically shows weak
fluorescence (upper right). When image appears on the
cloth, it quenches the fluorescence and gives it a brown
color (see "Hands" below). The small, triangular, white
area is where the Raes sample was cut in 1973. The
radiocarbon sample was cut upward from there about 1
cm to the right of the seam and about 7 cm long. The
area where the radiocarbon sample was taken is relatively
dark, a fact that is not the result of dirt, image color, or
scorching. The cloth is much less fluorescent in that area,
brightening into more typical fluorescence to the right.
The photograph proves that the radiocarbon area has a
different chemical composition than the main part of the
cloth. This was obviously not considered before the sample was cut.


- Someone in our group claimed, and appeared to show, that there were numerous other places on the Shroud with the same coloring as the C14 sample. Can anyone point me to that claim?

--- Jabba
Where's Rogers' evidence for his claims? His unsupported word is valueless, especially given his past. Further this very point was addressed previously two months ago.

And what exactly does this have to do with the radiocarbon dating? Or is repeating this debunked nonsense just an other of you attempts to distract?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 05:25 AM   #3178
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,685
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:[i]
The non-image cloth typically shows weak
fluorescence (upper right). When image appears on the
cloth, it quenches the fluorescence and gives it a brown
color (see "Hands" below). The small, triangular, white
area is where the Raes sample was cut in 1973. The
radiocarbon sample was cut upward from there about 1
cm to the right of the seam and about 7 cm long.


Would it be too much trouble for you to actually provide proper references?

Like, in this case, the actual picture that goes with this (bogus) commentary?





Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
The area where the radiocarbon sample was taken is relatively
dark,


Marginally.

And?


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
. . .a fact that is not the result of dirt, image color, or
scorching.


Says who?

It looks to me as though the slight darkening in that area was likely caused by whatever agency did the damage that required the patch.

You'd have to be pretty bloody desperate/delusional/flat-out lying to try and claim that it's because that area is made from different cloth.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
The cloth is much less fluorescent in that area,


No it's not.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
brightening into more typical fluorescence to the right.


We'd need to see the whole shroud to asses what is "typical" and even then we'd still be left asking "So what?"


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
The photograph proves that the radiocarbon area has a different chemical composition than the main part of the cloth.


It does no such thing.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
This was obviously not considered before the sample was cut.


Obvious to whom and in what way?


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Someone in our group claimed, and appeared to show, that there were numerous other places on the Shroud with the same coloring as the C14 sample. Can anyone point me to that claim?


It's hardly an earth-shattering claim. Why don't you just look at the damned thing?

I can't believe that simple observation doesn't reveal to you that yes, there's lots of bits that are that colour.


__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

Last edited by Akhenaten; 14th September 2012 at 05:38 AM.
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 05:31 AM   #3179
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,770
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:
--- SNIP ----
It isn't a paper. It's a FAQ. It has not been published nor peer-reviewed. The majority of the claims, including the one you quote, are entirely without references. The majority of the few references are not to papers but to Symposia and the like. The few references that are to papers are to those that have already been discredited (e.g., Adler in "Applied Optics.")

Then there is this beauty, from page 11 under question 13:

Originally Posted by From Rogers' FAQ that Jabba linked
The DNA in Shroud blood samples shows the effects of significant aging: only short lengths of the chain remain intact.
Really?

Not only have they proven blood on the shroud but they have DNA from it? Convenient that again there is no link to a reference. I, for one, will not consider another word from Rogers unless you can show the proof of this claim about DNA from Shroud blood.

The sources of your information and therefore the sources of your faith, Jabba, are utter crap. Rogers is not credible.

ETA: Don't take my comment about blood DNA as an invitation to avoid the C14 dating. That takes precedence. Focus your efforts on showing how that is wrong.
__________________
My kids still love me.

Last edited by Garrette; 14th September 2012 at 05:34 AM.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 05:46 AM   #3180
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:
The non-image cloth typically shows weak
fluorescence (upper right). When image appears on the
cloth, it quenches the fluorescence and gives it a brown
color (see "Hands" below). The small, triangular, white
area is where the Raes sample was cut in 1973. The
radiocarbon sample was cut upward from there about 1
cm to the right of the seam and about 7 cm long. The
area where the radiocarbon sample was taken is relatively
dark, a fact that is not the result of dirt, image color, or
scorching. The cloth is much less fluorescent in that area,
brightening into more typical fluorescence to the right.
The photograph proves that the radiocarbon area has a
different chemical composition than the main part of the
cloth. This was obviously not considered before the sample was cut.


- Someone in our group claimed, and appeared to show, that there were numerous other places on the Shroud with the same coloring as the C14 sample. Can anyone point me to that claim?

--- Jabba


Why don't you look yourself for any such claims that you want you use?

Afaik the whole of the shroud caries all sorts of dirty marks.

Your link does not appear to state where that article was published, does it? Where is that article taken from?

Unless that is from a genuine research publication, then it's utterly useless for you to keep posting pro-shroud beliefs from long time Christian shroud fanatics like STURP founder member Ray Rogers.
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 06:08 AM   #3181
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In a separate paper (http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/rogers5faqs.pdf), Rogers claims the following:[i]
The non-image cloth typically shows weak
fluorescence (upper right). ...
- Someone in our group claimed, and appeared to show, that there were numerous other places on the Shroud with the same coloring as the C14 sample. Can anyone point me to that claim? ...
Oh, Jabba.
Is that really all you could come up with?
A FAQ excerpt?

As for what you call a 'claim'- as the Pharaoh wrote, why not look at the shroud to see for yourself?

Originally Posted by Akhenaten View Post
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 07:25 AM   #3182
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 16,668
Quote:
The photograph proves that the radiocarbon area has a
different chemical composition than the main part of the
cloth.


No, this INDICATES that it's different. Chemical analysis is discussed up-thread.

Also, if Rogers is saying that a color photograph is fluorescence he's shown himself to be too ignorant to waste time on. A REAL fluoresence experiment may be of some value (never played with fluoresence with organic stuff--it was always thin-sections, looking fro growth patterns in the crystals), but to call a color photograph fluoresences is as honest as calling it the Electric Slide.

None of this has to do with C14 dating. The ptches are quite clearly visible in the photographs, indicating that whoever patched the thing obviously did so via standard means (which makes sense, anything else would be fraud). In order for this nonsense to be worth the spit it takes to say it you'd have to prove--not suggest, but PROVE--that some unique, never-before-seen technique never used since it was used on the shroud was used in this specific area.

You get back to us once you've done that.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 07:30 AM   #3183
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
OK Now i am laughing to tears and my colleague are asking what's up with me.

After being asked for the umpteenth time for argument against 14C published results , we are served a PDF FAQ from roger with dubious DNA claim in it, and "darknening" non peer reviewed claim out of the blue.

Thanks jabba, you made my day.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 07:55 AM   #3184
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,613
Evidence Against Carbon Dating

- I don't understand all this fussing.
- Clearly, if it is true that there are numerous other places on the Shroud that show the same darkening, Rogers has a serious problem with his claims -- and the dating is further supported.
- Wanting to believe Rogers, and tending to believe him, I have figured that while superficially there does appear to be numerous areas with the same darkening, there must be some difference that doesn't show up till we get a closer peek at these other areas. I was hoping to find some close ups of these other areas.
- If you notice, unlike the normal lawyer, I'm asking questions for which I don't know the answers. Could be that I'm going to get an answer that does shoot down this claim by Rogers -- and, that would be a serious setback for my side.

- Also, this was just something that occurred to me as I've been trying to track down all the peer-reviewed papers re the carbon dating. I posted it this morning because it was a question that could be important, and was easy to ask. I should have known, but didn't, that it wouldn't be easy to answer.
- Looking at the "big picture" (the whole cloth), most of the darkened areas are on the image -- which Rogers explains. I was hoping to find a close up or two of some of the other darkened areas, and proceed (somewhere) from there.
- Also, I didn't realize (or think about) the possibility of pasting that picture of the sample area to my posting...

--- Jabba
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:10 AM   #3185
IanS
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I don't understand all this fussing.
- Clearly, if it is true that there are numerous other places on the Shroud that show the same darkening, Rogers has a serious problem with his claims -- and the dating is further supported.
- Wanting to believe Rogers, and tending to believe him, I have figured that while superficially there does appear to be numerous areas with the same darkening, there must be some difference that doesn't show up till we get a closer peek at these other areas. I was hoping to find some close ups of these other areas.
- If you notice, unlike the normal lawyer, I'm asking questions for which I don't know the answers. Could be that I'm going to get an answer that does shoot down this claim by Rogers -- and, that would be a serious setback for my side.

- Also, this was just something that occurred to me as I've been trying to track down all the peer-reviewed papers re the carbon dating. I posted it this morning because it was a question that could be important, and was easy to ask. I should have known, but didn't, that it wouldn't be easy to answer.
- Looking at the "big picture" (the whole cloth), most of the darkened areas are on the image -- which Rogers explains. I was hoping to find a close up or two of some of the other darkened areas, and proceed (somewhere) from there.
- Also, I didn't realize (or think about) the possibility of pasting that picture of the sample area to my posting...

--- Jabba


The above is, yet again, 100% pure irrelevant waffle.

You were asked which science journal is your Rogers article is from?

Well? ... Which journal was it?
IanS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:10 AM   #3186
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 20,783
The shroudy position boils down to...

Quote:
Patches? We don't got no patches. We don't need no patches. We don't gotta show you no steenkin' patches!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqomZQMZQCQ

It even sounds right.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:22 AM   #3187
davefoc
Philosopher
 
davefoc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: orange country, california
Posts: 9,428
This is a link to a site that allows one to zoom in on any area of various detailed shroud images:

http://www.sindonology.org/shroudSco...oudScope.shtml

One use for the tool, suggested previously in this thread was to look for the banding that John P. Jackson and others claim is a basis for discounting the medieval "reweave" hypothesis.

Quote:
One hypothesis is that the linen sample used in the radiocarbon dating actually came from a medieval “re-weave”. While this hypothesis has been argued on the basis of indirect chemistry, it can be discounted on the basis of evident bandings in the 1978 radiographs and transmitted light images of STURP. These data photographs show clearly that the banding structures (which are in the Shroud) propagate in an uninterrupted fashion through the region that would, ten years later, be where the sample was taken for radiocarbon dating.
source: http://shroud.com/pdfs/jackson.pdf
__________________
The way of truth is along the path of intellectual sincerity. -- Henry S. Pritchett

Perfection is the enemy of good enough -- Russian proverb
davefoc is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:23 AM   #3188
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 16,668
Originally Posted by Jabba
- I don't understand all this fussing.
"All this fussing"? We're not infants squalling for our blankies--we're raising serious concerns about your arguments. You cannot simply dismiss them by calling them "fussing".

Quote:
- Wanting to believe Rogers,
Stop. Stop right there. You need to ask yourself some serious questions about why you're drawing the conclusions you are. Because this is just shy of admitting that you believe this because you want to, not because the facts support it. You need to figure out just how deep this bias goes, and just how many errors you have made because of it.

Quote:
I have figured that while superficially there does appear to be numerous areas with the same darkening, there must be some difference that doesn't show up till we get a closer peek at these other areas.
In other words, you made an assumption. It's wrong.

Quote:
- If you notice, unlike the normal lawyer,
There's no justification for pretending to be any lawyer of any type. I have told you, over and over and over, that this is a SCIENTIFIC question, not a legal one. You will NEVER find the true answers until you abandon the pretense that the legal system is a valid way to handle scientific debate. It's not, and your inability to see that is holding you back.

Quote:
Could be that I'm going to get an answer that does shoot down this claim by Rogers -- and, that would be a serious setback for my side.
I gave you two in my last post. Others have given you more.

Quote:
I should have known, but didn't, that it wouldn't be easy to answer.
It was extremely easy to answer. A cursory glance at the shroud shows that numerous areas are discolored, and a basic understanding of the terms demonstrates that what Rogers did isnt' fluoresence. He LIED. It really is as simple as that.

Quote:
- Looking at the "big picture" (the whole cloth), most of the darkened areas are on the image
I'd love to see your statistical analysis of this. Furthermore, many (I'd say most from a qualitative analysis) of the discolored areas are along the burn marks and the edges--areas we'd expect to be discolored. Finally, even if the discoloration is due to altered chemistry you need to prove that it changed the ratio of C14 to C12/C13. Merely switching up the chemical bonds won't do that.

You're admitting to dishonesty, on two counts, and are trying to play the victim. It won't work. Science requires evidence, which you've utterly failed to produce.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:27 AM   #3189
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
 
wollery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,944
Jabba, do you know how the picture in Roger's FAQ was taken? Was it back lit or front lit? is it a blown up section of a larger image or a close up of that specific area? What film and processing techniques were used? has that particular image been altered in any way? Is it a true colour image or a false colour image?

If you don't have the answers to these questions then the picture (and Roger's assertions) are worthless.

Let's take this image from a bit later in the pdf as an example of Roger's standard of evidence;



He claims that it shows a UV image of the hands and "bands of color and their effect on image color density". Well that's a crock. The image is so pixellated that there's no way to get reliable colour information from it, the banding could just as easily be an artefact of image processing as anything real.

We only have Roger's word that these are UV fluorescence images in the first place.
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad

"Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin

Last edited by wollery; 14th September 2012 at 08:28 AM.
wollery is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:35 AM   #3190
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,685
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Looking at the "big picture" (the whole cloth), most of the darkened areas are on the image


It seems that your need to believe is so strong that it means you can look at the same picture as everyone else and see something completely different.

Your observation that most of the darkened areas are on the image is clearly, demonstrably, unequivocally flat-out wrong.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
-- which Rogers explains.


For values of 'explains' that include 'makes stuff up holus-bolus'.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I was hoping to find a close up or two of some of the other darkened areas, and proceed (somewhere) from there.


Yeah, that sounds totally scientific.


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Also, I didn't realize (or think about) the possibility of pasting that picture of the sample area to my posting...


Isis wept, Jabba. I've been studying the shroud for about ten minutes total and I could present your case better than you have.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 08:43 AM   #3191
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 29,685
Originally Posted by wollery View Post
He claims that it shows a UV image of the hands and "bands of color and their effect on image color density". Well that's a crock. The image is so pixellated that there's no way to get reliable colour information from it, the banding could just as easily be an artefact of image processing as anything real.

We only have Roger's word that these are UV fluorescence images in the first place.


I noticed exactly the same things when I was preparing the picture I posted of the sample area.

The images in that PDF are absolutely horrid and there are almost as many jpeg artefacts in them as there are original pixels.

Further, as you allude, it seems to me that the pictures are normal white light photographs. They certainly look nothing like any other UV pictures I've ever seen.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 14th September 2012, 09:34 AM   #3192
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
...
- Clearly, if it is true that there are numerous other places on the Shroud that show the same darkening, Rogers has a serious problem with his claims -- and the dating is further supported. ...
- Wanting to believe Rogers, and tending to believe him, I have figured that while superficially there does appear to be numerous areas with the same darkening, there must be some difference that doesn't show up till we get a closer peek at these other areas. I was hoping to find some close ups of these other areas.

Is it possible you haven't ever used this invaluable link dave posted up?
It's been around for a number of years now.

Originally Posted by davefoc View Post
This is a link to a site that allows one to zoom in on any area of various detailed shroud images:

http://www.sindonology.org/shroudSco...oudScope.shtml...
You can do all the peeking you want at that site- it really is quite good!


Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- If you notice, unlike the normal lawyer, I'm asking questions for which I don't know the answers. Could be that I'm going to get an answer that does shoot down this claim by Rogers -- and, that would be a serious setback for my side.
Jabba, haven't you noticed that it's not about sides here?
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 15th September 2012, 01:53 PM   #3193
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,717
Quote:
Another Posts That Has No Evidence Against Carbon Dating
I took the liberty of fixing that title for you. Feel free to use it in your next 50 posts.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 09:22 AM   #3194
David Mo
Philosopher
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 5,036
Kouznetsov reborns!

Great news!?

A university professor has revived the old Kouznetsov theories with some interesting variants. Yes, Kouznetsov was debunked. Sindonists as William Meacham accept this. And the Tucson laboratory made an empirical refutation of the theory about contamination by fire. (A. J. T. Jull, D. J. Donahue and P. E. Damon: “Factors Affecting the Apparent Radiocarbon Age of Textiles…”, Journal of Archaeological Science (1996) 23, 157–160). But now, Francisco Alconchel-Pecino (Department of Applied Physics, Superior Technical School of Industrial Engineering, Polytechnic University of Madrid), in “A possible hypothesis for correcting the radiocarbon age of the Shroud of Turin”, (Sorry. I can link because the stupid Randi Forum Rules. You can see it here: Scientific Research and Essays Vol. 7(29), pp. 2624-2640, 30 July, 2012, Academicjournals. org ) claims this refutation is not valid because Jull et allia didn’t consider the big catalytic effect of the silver. He presents new mathematical calculi supporting the invalidation of the radiocarbon dating of the shroud.

I think this is pleasant sounding, but my mathematics is worse than my English.

What do you think?

Last edited by David Mo; 18th September 2012 at 09:23 AM. Reason: Mistake spelling
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 09:59 AM   #3195
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 20,783
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
Great news!?
Francisco Alconchel-Pecino
Somehow I can only read that as Francisco Alcohol-Pecino. Another round of Dom, perhaps?
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
(Sorry. I can link because the stupid Randi Forum Rules.)
Chuck random spaces in the text for the link and one of us will correct it.

ETA: Like "w w w. Whatever.org"
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...

Last edited by abaddon; 18th September 2012 at 10:01 AM.
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 10:45 AM   #3196
Hubert Cumberdale
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,140
Quote:
...snip.. claims this refutation is not valid because Jull et allia didn’t consider the big catalytic effect of the silver...snip...
Silver acts as a catalyst for radioactive decay?

Quick! Someone get some new laws of physics! The old ones are broke!
Hubert Cumberdale is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 01:37 PM   #3197
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 12,331
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Somehow I can only read that as Francisco Alcohol-Pecino. Another round of Dom, perhaps?
I'll second that notion.
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 05:44 PM   #3198
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 16,668
Quote:
in “A possible hypothesis for correcting the radiocarbon age of the Shroud of Turin”, (Sorry. I can link because the stupid Randi Forum Rules. You can see it here: Scientific Research and Essays Vol. 7(29), pp. 2624-2640, 30 July, 2012, Academicjournals. org ) claims this refutation is not valid because Jull et allia didn’t consider the big catalytic effect of the silver. He presents new mathematical calculi supporting the invalidation of the radiocarbon dating of the shroud.
They need to prove such a catalytic effect. It's possible (breeder reactors prove that decay can be accelerated), but I need to see evidence that 1) silver does it, and 2) that isotope is present in the shroud.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 10:49 PM   #3199
David Mo
Philosopher
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere on the Greenwich meridian
Posts: 5,036
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Somehow I can only read that as Francisco Alcohol-Pecino. Another round of Dom, perhaps?
Some problem with your glasses, perhaps?


Quote:
Chuck random spaces in the text for the link and one of us will correct it.

ETA: Like "w w w. Whatever.org"
Thank you.

w w w.academicjournals.org/sre/PDF/pdf2012/30JulSpeIss/Alconchel-Pecino.pdf
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 18th September 2012, 11:54 PM   #3200
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Never heard of scientifc research and essay before, started in 2008 apparentely they have a low impact factor is not cited often and has a very low international collaboration. it could be because it is a new journal though.

It is a theoretical article. My experience with theory is that by slightly changing hypotheses and assumption you can get wildly different results, the trick is to hide the assumption and lead to the result you want. There is a tons of equation and those assumption are not put very clearly. And there is no experimental verification.

Also looking at their conclusion they say the "however the experts give solid reason to think the shroud is from 1st century AD". I am sorry ? Which experts ??

I'll leave for work , but another consideration is that for such a SEMINAL work showing that 14C can replace in bulk in linen and break the dating by so much , why not in a very high impact factor journal, an established one on radiocarbon dating, archeology or even physic ? I mean this can change the dating of many stuff in archeology when there was a fire , that would be pretty much damn important.

Last edited by Aepervius; 18th September 2012 at 11:56 PM.
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.