Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Baidarka · 08-05-2004, 03:57 AM

Not the Alfred E Newman effect again!

Casper · 08-05-2004, 04:01 AM

I found an awesome book once that explained the shroud as the earliest known photographic image. It explained how the technology was available, the knowledge was not unheard of, and he actually created one himself to prove it. I wish I had spent the money on it. I can't remember the title or the author.

capnkirk · 08-05-2004, 07:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pervy Hobbit Fancier

A much more clear example of this on the shroud is to look at the face and the back of the head.

They are both undistorted 'mirror' images that meet at a point at the top point of the head.

The only way that this could happen from someone being wrapped in the shroud is for that person to have been a flat cardboard cut-out.

Agreed!

I hadn't expanded my analysis to the back-of-the-head image, but upon observation, it does contain the same flaws as the facial image.

The most surprising thing though is: "How scientists and other observers have overlooked this, or at least chosen not to make a major issue of it" in the 150 (appx) years since the first photograph of the shroud produced the negative image that allowed people to readily recognize the likeness?

This observation renders all the C14 testing results moot just as surely as finding a "made in China" imprint in the lower corner of the fabric. At the same time, these flaws are much harder to argue away (I would say impossible) than any scientific test where one has to trust the results of someone else's work. These flaws, once noted, can be pointed out to just about any layman, and he can see them for himself...making denial much more difficult.

__________________
Enterprise...OUT.

capnkirk · 08-05-2004, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jet Black

what is the proponents' usual reply to this sort of thing?

Guess we'll just have to find a proponent and confront him/her.

__________________
Enterprise...OUT.

Amaleq13 · 08-05-2004, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

I found an awesome book once that explained the shroud as the earliest known photographic image. It explained how the technology was available, the knowledge was not unheard of, and he actually created one himself to prove it. I wish I had spent the money on it. I can't remember the title or the author.

Are you thinking of Turin Shroud ?

Amaleq13 · 08-05-2004, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jet Black

what is the proponents' usual reply to this sort of thing?

Usually it involves an appeal to the unknown nature of the magical "radiation" that created the image.

capnkirk · 08-05-2004, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Usually it involves an appeal to the unknown nature of the magical "radiation" that created the image.

Of course, the operative word is magical.

When the true believers have to resort to "appellation to magic" to support their logically untenable their position, we have succeeded in isolating them from the majority of the population.

__________________
Enterprise...OUT.

Amlodhi · 08-05-2004, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

I found an awesome book once that explained the shroud as the earliest known photographic image. I can't remember the title or the author.

Hi Casper,

I don't know the name of the book you are referring to, but it sounds like you are describing the hypothesis that Leonardo DaVinci created the image with a camera obscura. I don't say that the theory is correct, but from what I've read of the man, it would be typical of him.

Amlodhi

Amaleq13 · 08-05-2004, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amlodhi

I don't know the name of the book you are referring to, but it sounds like you are describing the hypothesis that Leonardo DaVinci created the image with a camera obscura. I don't say that the theory is correct, but from what I've read of the man, it would be typical of him.

If that is the one he is thinking of, then it is definitely the one I linked above.

Sven · 08-06-2004, 02:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capnkirk

If you inspect the facial image on the Shroud, what you will see IS a mirror image!! That is, you see the image produced when a three dimensional head is REFLECTED off a plane surface like a mirror. What you DON'T see is the distortion produced when a flat surface is wrapped around/draped over a three dimensional object, stained, and then laid out flat again!

Strange. I think I heard from shroud proponents that the image is one which is obtained by wrapping around a flat surface over a three dimensional object and not a mirror image. Sorry, no links for this.

Regarding the claims that da Vinci made the image: This book also has been debunked, perhaps even here in this forum.

Just to clarify: I also believe the shroud to be a fake - but perhaps the evidence isn't so clear cut as some people suggest here.
(but I'm almost 100% sure that the carbon dating was accurate)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-05-2004, 03:57 AM	#11
Baidarka Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 590	Not the Alfred E Newman effect again!

08-05-2004, 04:01 AM	#12
Casper Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Texas Posts: 430	I found an awesome book once that explained the shroud as the earliest known photographic image. It explained how the technology was available, the knowledge was not unheard of, and he actually created one himself to prove it. I wish I had spent the money on it. I can't remember the title or the author.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.