Notices
Results 1 to 55 of 55
Like Tree9Likes
  • 1 Post By Lynx_Fox
  • 1 Post By Tranquille
  • 2 Post By astromark

Thread: Video the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image

  1. #1 Video the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    46
    Video document testifying that the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image:http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/shroudturinvideo.html


     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    According to Wikipedia:
    "The origins of the shroud and its image are the subject of intense debate among scientists, theologians, historians and researchers. Scientific and popular publications have presented diverse arguments for both authenticity and possible methods of forgery. A variety of scientific theories regarding the shroud have since been proposed, based on disciplines ranging from chemistry to biology and medical forensics to optical image analysis."
    (cf. Shroud of Turin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

    If you have truly demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image,
    you might as well publish your findings in a journal (instead of spreading them on YouTube).


    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  4. #3  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    It's materials are confirmed by several labs to be from the 13th century--that already ruled out it being authentic--it is settled.

    Irrational people will keep the so called arguments going ad naeuseam because they simply refuse to accept the evidence.
    pavlos likes this.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Markus Hanke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    7,302
    MODERATOR NOTE : Tentatively moved to the Religion section.
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Senior chero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by PetriFB View Post
    Video document testifying that the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image:http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/shroudturinvideo.html
    I watched a documentary saying it is. which is correct?
     

  7. #6  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by chero View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PetriFB View Post
    Video document testifying that the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image:http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/shroudturinvideo.html
    I watched a documentary saying it is. which is correct?

    Radiocarbon dating has shown that it is medieval (Damon, P.E. et al., 1989).
    Thus I would not go as far as calling the Shroud of Turin as authentic.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Senior chero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by chero View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PetriFB View Post
    Video document testifying that the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image:http://www.kotipetripaavola.com/shroudturinvideo.html
    I watched a documentary saying it is. which is correct?

    Radiocarbon dating has shown that it is medieval (Damon, P.E. et al., 1989).
    Thus I would not go as far as calling the Shroud of Turin as authentic.
    what was tested? the dried blood, the shroud, particles on the shroud?

    reference 3 gave me this:
    http://chemport.cas.org/cgi-bin/sdcg...620afb0c9adab5
    "The performance of 6 labs., 4 accelerator mass spectroscopy (AMS) and 2 small gas-counter labs., was compared in dating 100-mg samples of textiles from ancient Egypt and Peru."
    most references are unattainable (by me).
    Last edited by chero; October 29th, 2013 at 09:04 PM.
     

  9. #8  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by chero View Post
    what was tested? the dried blood, the shroud, particles on the shroud?
    The shroud materials:

    "The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95% confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of AD 1260 - 1390 (rounded down/up to nearest 10 yr). These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.The results of radiocarbon measurements from the three laboratories on four textile samples, a total of twelve data sets, show that none of the measurements differs from its appropriate mean value by more than two standard deviations. The results for the three control samples agree well with previous radiocarbon measurements and/or historical dates."


    Reference took about 10 seconds to find:
    Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not. The thing I liked most was it showed the face of what I considered was an older man. Jesus in my research was approx 48 years old when he was crucified, and it looks like a 48 year old to me on the Shroud.
    I wonder when they starting thinking Jesus was just 30 years old when he was crucified? A modern forgery definitely would sketch a younger looking man.
     

  11. #10  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not. The thing I liked most was it showed the face of what I considered was an older man. Jesus in my research was approx 48 years old when he was crucified, and it looks like a 48 year old to me on the Shroud.
    I wonder when they starting thinking Jesus was just 30 years old when he was crucified? A modern forgery definitely would sketch a younger looking man.

    How did you reach the conclusion that Jesus (as mentioned in the Bible) was approximately 48 years?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior chero's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    365
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not. The thing I liked most was it showed the face of what I considered was an older man. Jesus in my research was approx 48 years old when he was crucified, and it looks like a 48 year old to me on the Shroud.
    I wonder when they starting thinking Jesus was just 30 years old when he was crucified? A modern forgery definitely would sketch a younger looking man.
    See, I'm in the same boat. Well, similar. I don't see the Shroud as a symbol of religious right or proof. what ever it may be, I am not who I am because of it. It would be interesting to say the least if it was indeed as it is said to be.

    Part of the issue arises when some claim foul because of contamination. while others say, no. it is what it is. problems occur when explanations in detail to agree with or deny another claim is there or not there. confusing indeed
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    See his (now closed) intro thread. He either dreamed it or the voices in his head told him
    How many other introductions run to 2 full pages! and Have the glory of being closed by a moderator!
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    See his (now closed) intro thread. He either dreamed it or the voices in his head told him
    How many other introductions run to 2 full pages! and Have the glory of being closed by a moderator!

    I question your motives for being on the Science Forum if your display of pride due to the closure of your (lengthy) introduction thread is genuine.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not. The thing I liked most was it showed the face of what I considered was an older man. Jesus in my research was approx 48 years old when he was crucified, and it looks like a 48 year old to me on the Shroud.
    I wonder when they starting thinking Jesus was just 30 years old when he was crucified? A modern forgery definitely would sketch a younger looking man.

    How did you reach the conclusion that Jesus (as mentioned in the Bible) was approximately 48 years?
    In 1990 I had a revelation that Jesus had a twin brother and that his brother was Saint John (ST John 19:26-27), so I studied the history of that period and found that the only time in history that fits all the aspects of Luke's Gospel plus the writing of the Church Fathers it had to be 17 BC when both John and Jesus were born and if he was crucified in 31 AD I think that works out to about 48 years.
    That was further confirmed by research by Irenaeus (sp) that Jesus approached 50 years old and others who report the John live up to Emperor Trajan (103 AD) and that he was 120 years old when he died. I'll get some references if you need them. Some are easy to find but others more difficult.
    So even though they say the beloved disciple was younger than Jesus it was only by minutes not by years. He was the younger of the twin boys that Mary gave birth to.
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    See his (now closed) intro thread. He either dreamed it or the voices in his head told him
    How many other introductions run to 2 full pages! and Have the glory of being closed by a moderator!

    I question your motives for being on the Science Forum if your display of pride due to the closure of your (lengthy) introduction thread is genuine.
    Didn't you see my apology to Harold - It was going to close before long it had grown too long.
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    The length of a thread is no guarantee of quality, look in the trash can, there are many long threads filled with all sorts of shite and it's debunking. Being closed by a moderator is normally a good indicator the thread is a pointless waste of bandwidth, are you here to fill the forum with pages of nonsense (you seem to be implying that a 2 page thread is good even if it has no meaningful content) or have sensible discussions? I've got a sneaking suspicion it's the former.
    There are a lot of really important pieces of information in there, but most of it applies to just a few people so most of it would go over the top of the heads of the others, Tranquille, Bells, Beer w/Straw, Kalster will get most of it.
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    In 1990 I had a revelation...
    Oh boy . You do know this is a science forum? Anecdotes, delusions and confirmation bias mean very little outside of your head. Why should anyone take you seriously?
    The history research was genuine, it is all recorded in the history books. Didn't you read that I researched it. Research is science isn't it?
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    In 1990 I had a revelation that Jesus had a twin brother and that his brother was Saint John (ST John 19:26-27), so I studied the history of that period and found that the only time in history that fits all the aspects of Luke's Gospel plus the writing of the Church Fathers it had to be 17 BC when both John and Jesus were born and if he was crucified in 31 AD I think that works out to about 48 years.
    That was further confirmed by research by Irenaeus (sp) that Jesus approached 50 years old and others who report the John live up to Emperor Trajan (103 AD) and that he was 120 years old when he died. I'll get some references if you need them. Some are easy to find but others more difficult.
    So even though they say the beloved disciple was younger than Jesus it was only by minutes not by years. He was the younger of the twin boys that Mary gave birth to.

    Those are some extraordinary claims.
    If you can support your ideas with the appropriate (historical) sources, then it is a viewpoint worth considering.

    However, it is advisable to make a separate thread about your idea in the Scientific Study of Religion section,
    so that members who are more knowledgeable about (Biblical) history can give their input.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Research is science isn't it?
    Not always. Depends on the methodology used and if you are using revelation as your starting point I'd say it probably isn't. If your research is genuine why mention "revelations" and other nutjobbery in the first place?
    That was the reason I started the history research.
     

  21. #20  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Sorry I'm not sure what your point is here, probably because my head is tuned to Batshit FM...
    I'll repeat it for you "in 1990 I had a revelation that Jesus had a twin brother and that his brother was Saint John (ST John 19:26-27), so I studied the history of that period and found that the only time in history that fits all the aspects of Luke's Gospel plus the writing of the Church Fathers it had to be 17 BC when both John and Jesus were born and if he was crucified in 31 AD I think that works out to about 48 years.
    That was further confirmed by research by Irenaeus (sp) that Jesus approached 50 years old and others who report the John live up to Emperor Trajan (103 AD) and that he was 120 years old when he died. I'll get some references if you need them. Some are easy to find but others more difficult."

    So the revelation preceded the research and was the reason for the research.
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    In 1990 I had a revelation that Jesus had a twin brother and that his brother was Saint John (ST John 19:26-27), so I studied the history of that period and found that the only time in history that fits all the aspects of Luke's Gospel plus the writing of the Church Fathers it had to be 17 BC when both John and Jesus were born and if he was crucified in 31 AD I think that works out to about 48 years.
    That was further confirmed by research by Irenaeus (sp) that Jesus approached 50 years old and others who report the John live up to Emperor Trajan (103 AD) and that he was 120 years old when he died. I'll get some references if you need them. Some are easy to find but others more difficult.
    So even though they say the beloved disciple was younger than Jesus it was only by minutes not by years. He was the younger of the twin boys that Mary gave birth to.

    Those are some extraordinary claims.
    If you can support your ideas with the appropriate (historical) sources, then it is a viewpoint worth considering.

    However, it is advisable to make a separate thread about your idea in the Scientific Study of Religion section,
    so that members who are more knowledgeable about (Biblical) history can give their input.
    I will do that. It is time I found all those references again.
     

  23. #22  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not.
    Did you not read the post immediately before this?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Woo, pure and simple then
    You are quite blind aren't you!
     

  25. #24  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    So the revelation preceded the research and was the reason for the research.
    Did you ever get round to looking up Confirmation Bias?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I've watched all those Shroud of Turin videos on YouTube and I'm still undecided as to whether the Shroud is authentic or not.
    Did you not read the post immediately before this?
    There are arguments for and against. What was said in the post before was one side.
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    So the revelation preceded the research and was the reason for the research.
    Did you ever get round to looking up Confirmation Bias?
    When about 10 sources line up and the math comes out correct confirmational bias was overcome. I have looked it up once before, but not recently. So just for you I will do it again.
    Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence.
    Show me some contradictory evidence please?
     

  28. #27  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    [There are arguments for and against. What was said in the post before was one side.
    I would have thought the date pretty much destroyed any possibility of it being authentic. But who knows what goes on in your mind.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  29. #28  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    When about 10 sources line up and the math comes out correct confirmational bias was overcome.
    Not at all. Who reviewed your work?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    When about 10 sources line up and the math comes out correct confirmational bias was overcome.
    Not at all. Who reviewed your work?
    Well I will present it on TSF for you guys to review it. A few have read the book (35 pages ) that I wrote but no one has accepted it yet. It is pretty controversial, Christians don't like it, and it doesn't suit atheists either.
    Now the file was on a computer and on some back-ups and I'm not sure where they are just now but when I find the file again I will publish it on TSF OK.
    Last edited by Robittybob1; October 30th, 2013 at 02:54 PM.
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    [There are arguments for and against. What was said in the post before was one side.
    I would have thought the date pretty much destroyed any possibility of it being authentic. But who knows what goes on in your mind.
    Have you spent the time looking at all the documentaries?
     

  32. #31  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    17,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Have you spent the time looking at all the documentaries?
    Given the date, I don't see much point. Also, documentaries? Perhaps you could provide some links to peer reviewed science that demonstrates it is authentic. Or perhaps not.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Nope just rational, you on the other hand are quite barmy.
    Oh Thanks. Evidence is what I want. Please stop attacking me please, refute my claim with evidence please. I spent years gathering evidence pre-internet years and now with the internet the same research could be done in a couple of days. We are in a pretty lucky situation today.
    Refute my claims not me please.
     

  34. #33  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Strange View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Have you spent the time looking at all the documentaries?
    Given the date, I don't see much point. Also, documentaries? Perhaps you could provide some links to peer reviewed science that demonstrates it is authentic. Or perhaps not.
    Look don't get me wrong. Did I say I thought it was genuine? All I liked about the shroud was that it showed an image of an older man whereas modern forgeries would have been more likely to show a younger man. So if it is medieval did they also think Jesus was crucified at around 50 years of age in that era? That was my point all along.
    Video the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image
     

  35. #34  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Like the evidence in the peer reviewed paper dating the shroud that you have ignored because it doesn't fit your loony beliefs? You have made claims, it's up to you to support them - that's how science works, the default is you are wrong until you can show otherwise. You have not shown anything despite your claims of "research" and "evidence". All you have done is make unsupported claims and shown lunacy and a tendency to woo. It is this tendency and the lack of support for anything you have posted I am attacking not you. Why do cranks always take things so personally?
    Loony, lunacy, woo, cranks etc those are the sort of words that should not be used against me. You are the one showing the bias.
     

  36. #35  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Nope, no bias, anyone rational who reads the nonsense you have posted would come to the same conclusion. You ARE a loon, crank, woo-merchant etc. It's not an insult it's a matter of record.
    Now you are losing dignity Stop it please.
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Sorry, I'm still not tuned to Batshit FM. How does pointing out that you are an irrational loon cause me to lose dignity?
    You yelled at me. "ARE" Yelling at a fellow researcher is undignified.
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Mmmm, projection maybe - maybe you know this stuff is rubbish and you should be yelled at. All caps would be yelling. The odd word in caps is just for emphasis to my mind (I could have used italics or bold I suppose). The idea of you as a fellow researcher is quite funny though. You probably wouldn't last long in any of the places I've worked if your posts here are the sort of research you produce.
    What have you invented? What will you leave behind as your legacy to mankind?
     

  39. #38  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    What will you leave behind as your legacy to mankind?
    While a propagation of arrant stupidity may class as a legacy it's certainly one we could do without.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    OK in my introduction I admitted your research fields were different to mine. I have never written up a paper, but I spent time and money developing "grass Juice" as a milk replacer for calves. I still hope to make it work before I too become part of the sod.
    I love inventing and creating machines, but it can be expensive exercise if they don't turn out right.
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    What will you leave behind as your legacy to mankind?
    While a propagation of arrant stupidity may class as a legacy it's certainly one we could do without.
    Stay in your pond please.
     

  42. #41  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post

    When I look at some of the titles of your publications, it appears that the research brings you to some exotic places. Or am I mistaken?
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  43. #42  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    When I was a bit younger I did aircraft based field work. This ranged from (among other places) Bedford in the UK (not very exotic at all), to the Azores (quite exotic) to Borneo (very exotic) and Niger (just hot and nasty).

    Well, those are truly opportunities if your field work brings you to such places.
    I wished that I could do that (although I think that a PhD in biochemistry will not result in trips with an aircraft, unless one suddenly discovers enzymes in the troposphere)!
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
     

  44. #43  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    In 1990 I had a revelation that Jesus had a twin brother and that his brother was Saint John (ST John 19:26-27), so I studied the history of that period and found that the only time in history that fits all the aspects of Luke's Gospel plus the writing of the Church Fathers it had to be 17 BC when both John and Jesus were born and if he was crucified in 31 AD I think that works out to about 48 years.
    That was further confirmed by research by Irenaeus (sp) that Jesus approached 50 years old and others who report the John live up to Emperor Trajan (103 AD) and that he was 120 years old when he died. I'll get some references if you need them. Some are easy to find but others more difficult.
    So even though they say the beloved disciple was younger than Jesus it was only by minutes not by years. He was the younger of the twin boys that Mary gave birth to.

    Those are some extraordinary claims.
    If you can support your ideas with the appropriate (historical) sources, then it is a viewpoint worth considering.

    However, it is advisable to make a separate thread about your idea in the Scientific Study of Religion section,
    so that members who are more knowledgeable about (Biblical) history can give their input.
    I will do that. It is time I found all those references again.
    I did what you suggested http://www.thescienceforum.com/trash...orn-twins.html
    [h=1]Thread: Was Jesus the firstborn of twins?


     

  45. #44  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    You yelled at me. "ARE" Yelling at a fellow researcher is undignified.
    Your hallucination makes you a researcher? Or are you a researcher because you chose to act on your hallucinations and delusions?

    OK in my introduction I admitted your research fields were different to mine. I have never written up a paper
    I thought you claimed to be a scientist and then a researcher What kind of scientist has never written up a paper?
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Masters Degree Tranquille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Solar System
    Posts
    733
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    There are a lot of really important pieces of information in there, but most of it applies to just a few people so most of it would go over the top of the heads of the others, Tranquille, Bells, Beer w/Straw, Kalster will get most of it.
    I don't know about the others, but all I'm getting from it is that you should speak to a psychiatrist and get some help.

    Lots of help.
    Strange likes this.
     

  47. #46  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post

    When I look at some of the titles of your publications, it appears that the research brings you to some exotic places. Or am I mistaken?
    It is good to see some genuine people here.
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,015
    I am Atheist. 100% but yet, still enjoy a good conversation of this subject.. I do not think it fair that Bob gets dumped on from such height..
    He has a view, or idea that I and others here find as not supported., but, If he is researching the subject he has written of I can give him room to argue the idea.. This part of biblical history is not my strong point as I have a suspicious view of the written historic record of humanity from the middle east. He might not be a scholar.. yet still that is hardly a requirement for a hypothesis.
    I can show a little tolerance of his views.. and will read and see where it goes..
    Maybe Bob and I will sit together in the asylum. Pealing grapes and testing wine...
    Ascended and Robittybob1 like this.
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Tranquille View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    There are a lot of really important pieces of information in there, but most of it applies to just a few people so most of it would go over the top of the heads of the others, Tranquille, Bells, Beer w/Straw, Kalster will get most of it.
    I don't know about the others, but all I'm getting from it is that you should speak to a psychiatrist and get some help.

    Lots of help.
    I have been PM-ing Bells and she has given me good advice (being the lawyer that she is). She is better than any psychiatrist, for she is so lovely and sweet. Funny thing was no matter what she'd say I just found myself soothed by her, even she when was ticking me off. I don't believe she could really be mean even if she tried.
    But lying was not a problem, and that means she is not on my side.
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,015
    I think the science community is confident that a cloth found and no doubt how old it might have been could have been used to wrap the dead Jesus.. was there a dead Jesus to start with ?
    That it would 'NOT' be marked as found with a image. A painting with the dyes all washed out maybe.. sun bleached vegetable dyes.. ~ There are hundreds of other ways a cloth could show a image without it being used to wrap the dead... I Judge it as rubbish., and I have another idea to share ( but should not...) How old was this Mary girl ? was it a bastard child at all. ? Maybe Joseph had had his moment.. and was the father all along.. How many children did she have.. ? Was it all a construct of the Roman rulers to control the Jewish nation. I have more questions than answers.. yep that's normal... and no, I do not expect you to answer any or all... and I can not back up ANY of my wild imaginings.. can you ?...
     

  51. #50  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by astromark View Post
    I think the science community is confident that a cloth found and no doubt how old it might have been could have been used to wrap the dead Jesus.. was there a dead Jesus to start with ?
    That it would 'NOT' be marked as found with a image. A painting with the dyes all washed out maybe.. sun bleached vegetable dyes.. ~ There are hundreds of other ways a cloth could show a image without it being used to wrap the dead... I Judge it as rubbish., and I have another idea to share ( but should not...) How old was this Mary girl ? was it a bastard child at all. ? Maybe Joseph had had his moment.. and was the father all along.. How many children did she have.. ? Was it all a construct of the Roman rulers to control the Jewish nation. I have more questions than answers.. yep that's normal... and no, I do not expect you to answer any or all... and I can not back up ANY of my wild imaginings.. can you ?...
    There were the customs of the day for that community, and the story in the gospels fit the custom of the time. I have not read or heard of anyone giving an explanation of how the image has been imprinted and it has been incredible to show that it was a negative image. Having the cloth exposed to the air I wonder if that could not result in a higher level of Carbon 14 in the cloth (equilibrating with atmospheric carbon all the time. Could this happen?? hence appearing younger than it really was).
    Last edited by Robittybob1; October 31st, 2013 at 06:14 PM.
     

  52. #51  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Robittybob1 you've had plenty of time to add science into the discussion, but instead have persisted in nonsense and willful ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence than the shroud's cloth come from not earlier than about 1200.

    Is there any need to keep this thread open?
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  53. #52  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Robittybob1 you've had plenty of time to add science into the discussion, but instead have persisted in nonsense and willful ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence than the shroud's cloth come from not earlier than about 1200.

    Is there any need to keep this thread open?
    I thought Video the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image was scientific. Some organic material buried deep in the ground is obviously not under the same conditions as thin layers of cloth exposed to the atmosphere. I was suggesting there could be reasons, as others claim, that the cloth is older than the Carbon testing dates it at. Do you just ignore their objections?

    I think the Shroud of Turin is a real mystery and hence the thread should stay open till the dating is confirmed.
     

  54. #53  
    Genius Duck Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    12,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I have not read or heard of anyone giving an explanation of how the image has been imprinted and it has been incredible to show that it was a negative image.
    Yeah.
    So much for your previous claim to have"spent years gathering evidence".
    Did you just stop "gathering evidence" once you had enough to support what you want to believe?
    How to Make Your Own Shroud of Turin
    The Shroud of Turin - McCrone Research Institute (McRI) - Chicago, IL
    http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/craig.pdf
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I have not read or heard of anyone giving an explanation of how the image has been imprinted and it has been incredible to show that it was a negative image.
    Yeah.
    So much for your previous claim to have"spent years gathering evidence".
    Did you just stop "gathering evidence" once you had enough to support what you want to believe?
    How to Make Your Own Shroud of Turin
    The Shroud of Turin - McCrone Research Institute (McRI) - Chicago, IL
    http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/craig.pdf
    It would take time to go over those links but from memory I did look at some of them and I wasn't convinced they would come up with the same results.
    But that is something to do over the weekend.

    Are you convinced the results would be the same?
     

  56. #55  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Robittybob1 you've had plenty of time to add science into the discussion, but instead have persisted in nonsense and willful ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence than the shroud's cloth come from not earlier than about 1200.

    Is there any need to keep this thread open?
    I thought Video the Shroud of Turin is not Jesus' image was scientific. Some organic material buried deep in the ground is obviously not under the same conditions as thin layers of cloth exposed to the atmosphere. I was suggesting there could be reasons, as others claim, that the cloth is older than the Carbon testing dates it at. Do you just ignore their objections?

    I think the Shroud of Turin is a real mystery and hence the thread should stay open till the dating is confirmed.
    The dating is confirmed by independent labs. No the youtube wasn't really science.

    Not going to allow you to keep flagellating yourself in willful ignorance on this forum. Thread closed.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

Similar Threads

  1. How to convert video to iPod with ipod video converter?
    By douliduo in forum Computer Science
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 19th, 2010, 01:42 AM
  2. Image
    By Heinsbergrelatz in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: May 12th, 2010, 07:55 PM
  3. Jesus/God sacrifices to Jesus/God. This is not a sacrifice,
    By Greatest I am in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: February 19th, 2009, 08:50 AM
  4. Jesus whatever.
    By jacketate in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: December 20th, 2007, 08:50 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •