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 4th January 2016, 07:19 PM   #2321
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,496
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Really? A snarling pack of hounds? Charming.
Maybe he misspelled "snarking"? Anyway, if the shoe fits...

I kid, I kid. It's clearly a figure of speech. I think it well captures the fierce doggedness with which some pursue this game.

And while this thread does occasionally yield something interesting, I would say that what goes on here is quite charmless.
theprestige 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 4th January 2016, 07:23 PM   #2322
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Next door to Florida Man, world's worst superhero.
Posts: 14,961
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Really? A snarling pack of hounds? Charming.
Another way to look at that is if the whole world is put to get you, it's probably onto something. The problem may not be with the whole world.
Craig4 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 5th January 2016, 01:04 AM   #2323
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 38,827
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post

And while this thread does occasionally yield something interesting, I would say that what goes on here is quite charmless.
FTFY.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.Bertrand Russell
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
zooterkin 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 5th January 2016, 01:23 AM   #2324
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,745
Mostly.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo 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 5th January 2016, 06:02 AM   #2325
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,018
hugh farey: ISTR that you have indicated that apart from the C14 dating, you think that shroud is most likely authentic. I wonder if you could perhaps provide us with some evidence in favor of authenticity? All we've seen from Jabba, and lately David Mo and yourself, is attempts to call into question the evidence against authenticity. The problem is, even if you threw out the D'arcis memo, threw out the C14 dating, etc, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that actually points to a first century date, let alone tying it to a specific guy whose existence is somewhat in question. So why should anyone even consider the possibility of it being authentic?
jond 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 5th January 2016, 07:41 AM   #2326
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,760
An observation: David and Hugh have both been active on shroudstory.com which, on a cursory glance, looked to be a good-natured place where people who have an interest in the Filthy Dishrag got together to discuss it at length. As someone says in response to Dan Porter's farewell

Quote:
If anyone knows of a website where it’s possible to read and post comments about the shroud on a daily basis, please provide the link.
This place isn't like that. Here, the CIQ is just another mundane item that some people thought was supernatural in origin, but has been thoroughly (spectacularly) debunked. The chances of it being c. 2000 years old are so vanishingly small, what's the point of splitting hairs over what a pope said about it.

Here the question is "show us the evidence?" The answer to this isn't, "your debating techniques are ineffective." This response will draw a lot of impolite comments.
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
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 5th January 2016, 11:36 AM   #2327
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,496
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
FTFY.
See what I mean? Charmless.

And it's not even a good joke, is it? A thing--this thread for example--can lack both charm and harm. It's not a "fix" to swap one for the other.

Anyway, why is it important to you to point out that this thread is harmless? Was there some implication that the thread might be harmful somehow?
theprestige 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 5th January 2016, 11:47 AM   #2328
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
There is not any scientific theory about the shroud that has been able to produce an exact replica of the Shroud with medieval resources.
Very well, science cannot yet explain how the image was made, if by forgery as thought. But the claimants for authenticity cannot yet explain how the image was made, if by supernatural or any other speculative means.

Quote:
This situation goes on from a century and after more than ten failed attempts of replying it. Therefore, the Shroud is unavailable to science.
Nonsense. Science can tell us the image is anatomically and gravitationally incorrect. This indicates artifice. Demanding that science pull out of some orifice the exact process used many hundreds of years ago sets a very high bar. Interpreting failure to replicate the image as evidence that the image was not forged requires exhaustive knowledge of the ways in which it may have been forged. Sadly, as in all such science, validating the rediscovery of lost arts is necessarily incremental.

In the meantime it's far more parsimonious to believe in an as-yet undiscovered forgery method than in the claims made by Shroud enthusiasts.

Quote:
Obviously this doesn’t refute directly the 1988 dating, but introduces the mystery and opens the way to alternative knowledge.
Speculating on what hitherto unknown biological process or what inscrutable supernatural effect produced the image isn't any kind of knowledge. The only knowledge we have is a conclusive dating of the fabric.
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 12:20 PM   #2329
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,582
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Nonsense. Science can tell us the image is anatomically and gravitationally incorrect. This indicates artifice. Demanding that science pull out of some orifice the exact process used many hundreds of years ago sets a very high bar.
...especially since we don't know what it actually looked like when it was made. So to replicate the shroud, you have to wait 700 years to see if it comes out right.


Quote:
Interpreting failure to replicate the image as evidence that the image was not forged requires exhaustive knowledge of the ways in which it may have been forged.
...and what it looked like when it was first made.

On the other hand, we know that, regardless of what it looked like originally, wrapping a body in a sheet will NOT give the image that is on the shroud, not immediately, and not in 2000 years.


Quote:
Sadly, as in all such science, validating the rediscovery of lost arts is necessarily incremental.

In the meantime it's far more parsimonious to believe in an as-yet undiscovered forgery method than in the claims made by Shroud enthusiasts.
Yeah. "We don't (actually, we _can't_) know for sure how it was forged" isn't a a great thing to say, but it's a lot better than "We know it's NOT the result of wrapping a sheet around a dead body 2000 years ago, much less that of Jesus as described in the bible."

It's true, we may not know exactly how it was done, but we can say unequivocally how it was NOT done.



Quote:
Speculating on what hitherto unknown biological process or what inscrutable supernatural effect produced the image isn't any kind of knowledge. The only knowledge we have is a conclusive dating of the fabric.
It's very clear to me now that the "authenticists" ultimately are just trying to show that it is a miracle, and therefore must be Jesus. That's why they don't bother with evidence for authenticity, and spend their time complaining about how no "artist" has ever been able to reproduce the shroud, while completely ignoring the fact that no "authenticist" has ever been able to even reproduce the picture, much less the shroud itself. It doesn't matter, because if it can't be reproduced, it's because it was a miracle.
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets
pgwenthold 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 5th January 2016, 01:16 PM   #2330
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
See what I mean? Charmless.

And it's not even a good joke, is it? A thing--this thread for example--can lack both charm and harm. It's not a "fix" to swap one for the other.

Anyway, why is it important to you to point out that this thread is harmless? Was there some implication that the thread might be harmful somehow?
One wonders: if you, personally, are not "charmed", and are not enjoying yourself, why are you here?

Might I ask which of the threads here on ISF you, personally, find "charming"?
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 5th January 2016, 02:21 PM   #2331
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,496
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
One wonders: if you, personally, are not "charmed", and are not enjoying yourself, why are you here?
Like I said, it's occasionally a source of interesting information. And there are other forms of enjoyment.

Quote:
Might I ask which of the threads here on ISF you, personally, find "charming"?
Now that you mention it, I'm having a hard time thinking of even one.
theprestige 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 5th January 2016, 03:48 PM   #2332
Jabba
Illuminator
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,949
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
__________________
"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 5th January 2016, 03:53 PM   #2333
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,099
You've had all this time off where you should have got you evidence together, for once, and you immediately say, " I'll try to present that evidence." Yawn.
__________________
"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 5th January 2016, 04:19 PM   #2334
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,001
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
No evidence then.


Sent from my SM-A300FU using Tapatalk
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
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 5th January 2016, 04:34 PM   #2335
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Next door to Florida Man, world's worst superhero.
Posts: 14,961
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
We are all pretty much asking the same questions so I'm not sure why you're having a problem.
Craig4 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 5th January 2016, 04:50 PM   #2336
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,328
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
You don't attend to anyone's objections, even when they are repeated by multiple people. Same **** different year.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon 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 5th January 2016, 04:52 PM   #2337
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence.
No.

This just resets the discussion back to a month or so ago when you tried to tell everyone that your rampant handwaving and speculation constituted some form of evidence and was probative by its sheer alleged volume. You presented nothing that qualified as any kind of evidence, and your presentation was all of two points, which you abandoned. You have neither anything qualifying as evidence (circumstantial or otherwise), nor an abundance of it.

Quote:
The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions...
Nonsense. When you do attend to anything, it's to endlessly equivocating, evading, and stalling. You do nothing else. If you have time to actively stall, you have time to address all comers. Get on with it without further delay.

Quote:
For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...
Shifting the burden of proof. In order for the cloth to be authentic, you have to prove the alleged blood spots are blood, and even then that doesn't rule out forgery. Blood is a valid artistic medium. You don't get to assume the spots are identifiable as that specific thing (among the panoply of available substances) and task your critics with coming up with some conclusive identification to the contrary. That's tantamount to a begged question.

And before we let you change horses yet again to another of your well-worn subjects, let's be clear on the disposition of Marino and Prior so that we don't have to endure a likely return to it after you think your critics have forgotten your inability to understand or defend it. Since you rejected both documents (the chronology and the addendum) and gave no reason for suddenly returning to them before now abandoning them both again in favor of blood, will you agree not to attempt presenting Marino and Prior again?

Last edited by JayUtah; 5th January 2016 at 05:06 PM.
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 04:59 PM   #2338
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,001
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
We all did the blood crackpottery several times already. Are you somehow suggesting that it is everyone else's fault that you didn't pay attention? Is that what you are trying to do? Yet another fringe reset? With no actual evidence pertaining, just a baseless claim that you have"some" evidence which you decline to share yet again? Do you really think that will fly?

Guess again, Jabba.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
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 5th January 2016, 05:06 PM   #2339
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,745
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.

Go on then, nobody can stop you. Apart from yourself, of course.

Quote:
- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)...

Well, don't worry about doing that, then: just present your evidence.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo 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 5th January 2016, 05:22 PM   #2340
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,582
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...
Actually, I do you one even better.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, they ARE blood.

And? Explain how that is evidence for a 2000 year old burial cloth.

Do you not think that there was blood available in the middle ages?

ETA: BTW, before you pull the "it tips the scales" nonsense: NO, it doesn't. There is nothing about blood on the shroud that would suggest a preference for authenticity. It adds just as much weight to the non-authentic side as it does to the authentic side, so it does NOT tip the scales in either direction.
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets

Last edited by pgwenthold; 5th January 2016 at 05:26 PM.
pgwenthold 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 5th January 2016, 05:26 PM   #2341
hugh farey
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 506
Fair enough, Jond (#2325), but YSTR the case from some time ago. I would love the Shroud to be authentic, same as I would love the Loch Ness Monster to be authentic (Why not? What fun weird and unlikely things are!), and like Houdini's search for authentic communication with the dead, I have searched the existing evidence (particularly that which had persuaded me of the authenticity of the shroud before I changed my mind), and carried out some research myself, to try to persuade myself that it is. Sadly, I have not, so far, succeeded, although I think there are a few historical grey areas which are so far inaccessible.

However, those "historical grey areas" which do not convince me are compelling to many others, and, coupled to a few other bits of geological and biological evidence, and the easy dismissal of many of the less precise arguments put forward in favour of a medieval provenance, constitute a large body of pro-authenticity support.

The Shroud is, I think, an artefact of much wider general interest than almost any other historical object. It never ceases to surprise me, as I review recent publications for the BSTS newsletter, that fictional adventures involving the Shroud as a major part of the plot are published at the rate of about one a month. I do not know if the same can be said of the Mona Lisa, the Pyramids or any other religious artefact, but the Shroud is certainly up there with the best of them. What's more, it cannot be said that there is any overwhelming consensus either in favour, or against, authenticity. As such, it is a fair topic for debate, and anyone from either side could fairly call themselves 'skeptical' of the opinions of the others. There is a lot to be said for allowing this state of affairs to continue, but it is in the nature of Scientists not only to want to pin down the truth of the matter, but also to achieve at least a majority, if not universal consensus. Those who think the earth is spherical vastly outnumber those who think it flat, and perhaps there is little value in trying to persuade them otherwise, but opinions about the Shroud are far less polarised, which is why discussion about it is as plentiful now as it ever was.

Filippo Lippi (#2326), are you sure you aren't deceiving yourself? If "thoroughly debunked" implies some kind of general acceptance, then nothing could be further from the truth. I do not think that the aim of internationalskeptics is simply to establish dogma, indeed, as a teacher myself, I think its aim is to educate people in rational exploration and 'critical thinking' (a phrase which occurs 4 times in the JREF mission statement page). This cannot be done by mere dismissal of the eccentric, and nor can it be done by less than critical thinking on the part of the critical thinkers themselves. Slowvehicle's last list of "arguments against authenticity" (#2270), which I know have been reiterated many times, and so have perhaps become less than precise more by neglect than intent, are all arguable, and, as we have seen, in some cases simply wrong. They are adequate for preaching to the already converted, and more than adequate against the pro-authenticist quarry this thread has been pursuing for so long, but wholly unlikely to educate more informed authenticists, who may begin to visit this site, into critical re-evaluation. Instead of the "I'm right you're wrong" approach of your comment, this thread would benefit from a "Why I'm right and why you're wrong" attitude.

For instance, JayUtah claims that "Science can tell us the image is anatomically and gravitationally incorrect." Can it? Can JayUtah point to any comparative measurements that would substantiate his anatomical claim? I have myself attempted comparative measurements, but it is extremely difficult to define specific anatomical points on the Shroud from which to derive measurements to compare to standard, or even non-standard, human dimensions. Various forensic pathologists have attempted to assess the height of the man imaged in the Shroud, but the range of these (over 20cm) attests to the difficulty of the task. I should be very interested in JayUtah's evidence. By 'gravitational' I suppose JayUtah to be considering the image of the hair (although there are other gravitational considerations), which appears to look more like hair hanging vertically from a standing man than hair falling away from the face on a lying man. However this assumes that the image of the hair is a contact print. If the image were able to form at a distance, then the problem is negated. There seems to be a consensus among internationalskeptics commenters that authenticists are all stupid, and blind to the most obvious objections to their view. This is naive. Many of them, like myself, have spent years considering all the possible factors involved, and differ only in that, unlike myself, they consider that the preponderance of evidence points to authenticity rather than non-authenticity.
hugh farey 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 5th January 2016, 05:32 PM   #2342
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by hugh farey View Post
Can JayUtah point to any comparative measurements that would substantiate his anatomical claim?
The arms have always looked wrong, even before the carbon dating eclipsed other evidence of forgery. The head has always looked too big.

Quote:
If the image were able to form at a distance, then the problem is negated.
If.

Last edited by JayUtah; 5th January 2016 at 05:44 PM.
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 05:42 PM   #2343
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by hugh farey View Post
[T]he easy dismissal of many of the less precise arguments put forward in favour of a medieval provenance, constitute a large body of pro-authenticity support.
No, they do not. They cannot. This is the transgression committed by nearly every fringe theorist, to suppose that some deficiency in arguing for one conclusion somehow affirms another. It begs the question rather egregiously.
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 05:42 PM   #2344
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,582
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post

If.
See my comment above about the miracle claim. There's Hugh's version.
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets
pgwenthold 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 5th January 2016, 05:55 PM   #2345
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
See my comment above about the miracle claim. There's Hugh's version.
Exactly what I was alluding to. The Shroud devotees seem to think that speculating toward the supernatural somehow constitutes a valid explanation that should stand on par with more parsimonious conclusions. Outside the walled garden such speculation simply doesn't fly. It's far more parsimonious to explain the "hair" as a mistake made by an artist forgetting he was rendering a supine corpse than it is by some purported magical ability to create an image "at a distance."
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 05:59 PM   #2346
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,870
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
See what I mean? Charmless.

[...]
I seem to recall [....]

You know what? Never mind. I don't want to participate in any more derails.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones 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 5th January 2016, 06:00 PM   #2347
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,001
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
No, they do not. They cannot. This is the transgression committed by nearly every fringe theorist, to suppose that some deficiency in arguing for one conclusion somehow affirms another. It begs the question rather egregiously.
Hugh is a sindonist. I pointed this out way back in a previous incarnation of this thread and he denied it vehemently.
At last he has come right out and stated it.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
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 5th January 2016, 06:03 PM   #2348
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 14,493
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Hugh is a sindonist. I pointed this out way back in a previous incarnation of this thread and he denied it vehemently.
At last he has come right out and stated it.
Making the "You guys debate unfairly" claims fairly amusing. False-flag marches rarely have the high moral ground as their destination.
JayUtah 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 5th January 2016, 06:08 PM   #2349
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I think I'm back.

- I'll try to present my evidence for the shroud being ~2000 yrs old.
- Again, I admit that I have little, or no, direct evidence for it being ~2000 yrs old. But, I do think that I have a lot of circumstantial evidence. I'll try to present that evidence.

- The trick here is that I simply cannot attend to nearly all of everyone's objections and questions (at least, not in any kind of timely manner)... Consequently, unless you guys can figure out a better way to determine what I should address next, I'll just have to decide for myself what seems the most important.
- For now, I think the blood sub-issue is especially important, and I'll address that first. For instance, if you guys could convince me that the stains are probably not blood, I would probably give up the ghost...

- Dinner time.
My Dear Mr. Savage:

These are some hard bones you bring us.

Well, let's see. Other than the fact that important trace elements, components of actual blood, are absent; and the fact that the iron is in forms commonly used in medieval pigments; and the fact that the amount of "blood" represented is inconsistent with a body prepared "as was the custom of the Jews" (i.e., washed); and the fact that the "blood" is represented as "flowing" in directions that ignore gravity; and the fact that the "blood" is represented as NOT demonstrating the capillary action and the adsorption and matting effects with which actual blood would react with cloth and hair; and the fact that the claimed "serum retraction rings" would be formed by any insoluble pigment in a liquid vehicle when daubed or dropped on a sized and gessoed fabric surface; I suppose what we are left with is the fact that dried blood is dark-brown-to-black in color, not bright red.

Do you remember the "strike thirteen" post?

Through it all, I remain,

Triskadecaphilically yours, &ct.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle 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 5th January 2016, 06:20 PM   #2350
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 11,870
Originally Posted by hugh farey View Post
Fair enough, Jond (#2325), but YSTR the case from some time ago. [MAJOR SNIP].
I'm not going to wade through that wall of words. If you have a concise point to make, let us see it.

If your point is that you are erudite, I won't bother arguing that issue with you.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave

Last edited by John Jones; 5th January 2016 at 07:12 PM.
John Jones 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 5th January 2016, 06:44 PM   #2351
wardenclyffe
Master Poster
 
wardenclyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,226
@zooterkin and @hugh farey

Perhaps the two of you could work together to start a new shroud thread. I think with the demise of shroudstory, we might have an opportunity to attract new posters to this forum. I think it would be difficult for a new poster to dive into this series of threads. I have not posted in this thread, nor its immediate predecessor because it seemed pointless. The only person presenting the pro-authenticity side could not even remember his own original research. While I still followed the threads, they held all the charm (or harm) of a group of men kicking a homeless guy.

I would really enjoy discussions about the shroud which is a fascinating artifact no matter what it is. We cannot promise a place as convivial as shroudstory, but perhaps we can promise a clean room to start in.

I suppose that Hugh could probably just start his own thread, but there'd be a risk that it would just be merged with this monstrosity. That's why I'm suggesting that zooterkin gets involved.

Ward
__________________
~~Na eth'er aa, ammre' en ank'aar'eith, d'emner'aa-, asd'reng'aather, em'n'err-aae...~
- Alenara Al'Kher'aat, aged 347
wardenclyffe 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 5th January 2016, 10:18 PM   #2352
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 17,001
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
My Dear Mr. Savage:

These are some hard bones you bring us.

Well, let's see. Other than the fact that important trace elements, components of actual blood, are absent; and the fact that the iron is in forms commonly used in medieval pigments; and the fact that the amount of "blood" represented is inconsistent with a body prepared "as was the custom of the Jews" (i.e., washed); and the fact that the "blood" is represented as "flowing" in directions that ignore gravity; and the fact that the "blood" is represented as NOT demonstrating the capillary action and the adsorption and matting effects with which actual blood would react with cloth and hair; and the fact that the claimed "serum retraction rings" would be formed by any insoluble pigment in a liquid vehicle when daubed or dropped on a sized and gessoed fabric surface; I suppose what we are left with is the fact that dried blood is dark-brown-to-black in color, not bright red.

Do you remember the "strike thirteen" post?

Through it all, I remain,

Triskadecaphilically yours, &ct.
Not to mention that even were it actual blood on the tablecloth, that provides not a bit of evidence for a 2,000 year date.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
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 5th January 2016, 11:24 PM   #2353
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,328
So, Jabba, to at least one you present analogous to a feeble bum.
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon 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 6th January 2016, 12:20 AM   #2354
wardenclyffe
Master Poster
 
wardenclyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,226
What does that make you in this analogy?

Ward
__________________
~~Na eth'er aa, ammre' en ank'aar'eith, d'emner'aa-, asd'reng'aather, em'n'err-aae...~
- Alenara Al'Kher'aat, aged 347
wardenclyffe 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 6th January 2016, 01:26 AM   #2355
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Next door to Florida Man, world's worst superhero.
Posts: 14,961
Is there a period in history in which blood was in short supply? Even is in were blood, why would that support authenticity?
Craig4 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 6th January 2016, 01:47 AM   #2356
AdMan
Penultimate Amazing
 
AdMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,293
Originally Posted by Craig4 View Post
Is there a period in history in which blood was in short supply? Even is in were blood, why would that support authenticity?

As has been asked here ad infinitum, ad nauseam. Jabba, did you really already forget, or are you simply being dishonest?
__________________
As long as people believe in absurdities they will continue to commit atrocities.
- Voltaire.
AdMan 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 6th January 2016, 02:16 AM   #2357
Sideroxylon
Featherless biped
 
Sideroxylon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Aporia
Posts: 18,328
Originally Posted by wardenclyffe View Post
What does that make you in this analogy?

Ward
That's obvious but I don't agree with it. Jabba has been a wilful participant in his threads. What makes you think he has been harmed?
__________________
'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman
Sideroxylon 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 6th January 2016, 02:23 AM   #2358
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 9,916
It really does beggar belief that Jabba would declare an intention to present the evidence for the shroud being 2000 years old, and then promptly raise an issue which has no bearing whatsoever on the shroud's age.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 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 6th January 2016, 02:49 AM   #2359
Filippo Lippi
Master Poster
 
Filippo Lippi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,760
Originally Posted by hugh farey View Post

Filippo Lippi (#2326), are you sure you aren't deceiving yourself? If "thoroughly debunked" implies some kind of general acceptance, then nothing could be further from the truth.
No, it doesn't mean "general acceptance," because some people have a desperate need for the shroud to be authentic. However, the carbon dating established that the shroud isn't 2000 years old. Why don't you lobby the Vatican to have the dating repeated if you're convinced it's wrong instead of your florid version of Jabba's "create the controversy."
__________________
"You may not know anything about the issue but I bet you reckon something.
So why not tell us what you reckon? Let us enjoy the full majesty of your uninformed, ad hoc reckon..."
David Mitchell
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 6th January 2016, 02:55 AM   #2360
David Mo
Master Poster
 
David Mo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,006
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
I honestly can't tell if you are intentionally adopting an obtuse pose, or if you simply do not get apprehend the issue.

Oh, well.
This is not ananswer. This is a flight of fancy.
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
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 09:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.