The Shroud of Turin: Real or Hoax

"1977, a team of scientists selected by the Holy Shroud Guild developed a program of tests to conduct on the Shroud, designated the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). Anastasio Cardinal Ballestrero, the archbishop of Turin, granted permission, despite disagreement within the Church. The STURP scientists conducted their testing over five days in 1978. Walter McCrone, a member of the team, upon analyzing the samples he had, concluded in 1979 that the image is actually made up of billions of submicron pigment particles.[citation needed] The only fibrils that had been made available for testing of the stains were those that remained affixed to custom-designed adhesive tape applied to thirty-two different sections of the image. (This was done in order to avoid damaging the cloth.) According to McCrone, the pigments used were a combination of red ochre and vermillion tempura paint."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shroud_of_Turin

 

shredderbeam2: Sorry big boy but those test are false. Oh and by the way 100K man hours prove that those test are false and the Shroud real age is correct. Let alone some other truths.

 

You don't just say something is false without providing evidence to the contrary. Those videos didn't prove a single thing. You're an idiot if this is your only way of debating.

 

You dig up wiki, I did up videos + wiki, what's the difference?

 

Youtube videos prove nothing. Anyone with any views can make a video. Please, self pride is non-existent on sythe.org

In regards to the tests being wrong, 3 individual teams, did separate tests, which proved each time the shroud to be from the Middle Ages and not the first century A.D. The only thing the church said in response to the testing was of course some lame excuse about water + fire damage, wrong testing material, and pollen/bacteria covering the shroud.

Shroud of Turin = Hoax

 

First, don't ever call me big boy again.

Second, saying they are false does not make them false.

Third, what 100k man hours? Are you just throwing around a large number to lend validity to your claims?

Fourth, what are the other truths?

 

I wouldn't expect a valuable answer to those questions, Shredder.

 

This is really strange the other day our teacher in class was talking about ths for about 10 15 minutes.

He said that sent some samples off to various universities and they came back it was in the 17th century. I'm sure it says that in your post though.

Anyway that's what i believe.

 

Yea, but if he was laying down gravity would pull his hair down to the ground, so how does his hair get on the cloth? Same with his teeth. Even if that is Jesus, he's fugly

 

I dont know, could be real, could not be, no one knows and it willl probably never be proven whether or not its real.

 

It is known in history that jesus DID exist, there are official documents and records of this. Maybe this was the covering of him when he died maybe not, personnaly i dont believe in the resurection but I do believe that he was crucified, mainly because it is recorded in history, not just the bible.

For those on here who say Jesus didnt exist HE DID. He was a Jewish preacher (he wasnt Christian, Christianity grew up around 40-50 years AFTER his death). History has plenty of evidence he existed so stop saying he didnt.

Personally I do not know what to believe with the shroud and it doesnt really matter to me whether it was on his face or not

 

There are NO historical documents that mention Jesus. That time period is very well documented, yet there are none. Go ahead, look for some.

 

I think that it did cover Jesus

 

Yes. And as shredder always says, "The Gospels weren't intended to be a biography of Jesus"

No one cares what you think. Show some proof next time.

 

1) Some people do.

2) He is God, part of the Trinity, his imprint I guarantee wouldn't be anything you could physically duplicate.

 

The Church, at least the Roman Catholic one, never issued any statement about it being damaged, let alone if where did the Church ever state if it was real in their eyes.