Freethought & Rationalism Archive

semiopen · 04-21-2010, 12:01 PM

Here is an interesting dichotomy.

I'm convinced that the AB blood type presence is unsound and that it is unclear whether the shroud has blood.

The big issue is that the contrary evidence is not made by the experts who would be most capable of analyzing the shroud... in this case forensic/physical anthropologists.

Lately, shroud sites are quoting the Troyers.

http://creationevolutiondesign.blogs...stains-on.html

Quote:

In June 1993 he provided some of this sample to a visiting American microbiology professor, Dr Leoncio Garza-Valdes, who took it back for analysis at the University of Texas' Center for Advanced DNA Technologies at San Antonio, Texas. There the laboratory director, Dr Victor Tryon, and his technician wife, Nancy Mitchell Tryon, quickly established that the sample was human blood of the AB group, just as Baima-Bollone had before them. They also determined that it had both X and Y chromosomes, indicating that the individual from whom it came was male. Three unmistakable gene segments were identified, beta globin from chromosome 11, amelogenin X from chromosome X and amelogenin Y from chromosome Y, a finding quite impossible if the Shroud `blood' were merely iron oxide as contended by Walter McCrone." (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.77-78).

Dr Tryon seems to be a reputable guy and this might be considered important, however, he was also interviewed by Time in 1998.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...8184-9,00.html

Quote:

Of the tests, Tryon says, "All I can tell you is that DNA contamination is present and that the DNA belonged either to a human or another higher primate. I have no idea who or where the DNA signal came from, nor how long it's been there." It is, he says, not necessarily the remains of blood. "Everyone who has ever touched the shroud or cried over the shroud has left a potential DNA signal there." Tryon quit the project soon after his tests. "I saw it as a multidisciplinary project involving archaeology, physiology and other fields. But I came to believe there was another agenda present too. It was my first encounter with zealotry in science."

WTF, it is rare to see two more opposite reports.

Note, Dr Tryon says that the presence of blood is not a certainty, and that it should be a multidisciplinary project.

My theory is that Nancy might be responsible for the recent activity.

Huon · 04-21-2010, 01:01 PM

Was it impossible to find male human blood in Champagne around 1357 ?

semiopen · 04-21-2010, 01:17 PM

The actual stains are not clearly blood. That's what Tryon (and perhaps Merriwether say). If they are not blood, the shroud is almost certainly a hoax.

The AB blood is of some importance because the

Sudarium_of_Oviedo has also been claimed to have AB blood. If this test was also wrong, as seems almost certain, that odd coincidence is explained. As a previous poster suggested but did not support, it is possible that a standard test on ancient stains tends to give a false result of AB whether or not the stain is even blood.

It is also true, as Huon suggests, that the existence of blood on the shroud does not confirm its authenticity, but apparently we are not at that point yet.

Toto · 05-06-2010, 12:24 PM

The SecularWeb has just published a note on the Shroud: The Shroud of Turin: The Great Gothic Art Fraud — Because If It's Real the Brain of Jesus Was the Size of a Protohuman's!

Quote:

This note is intended to describe why, from an artistic and anatomical perspective, the shroud image is an embarrassingly obvious fraud committed by a Gothic artist following the standard conventions of his time. The artistic errors are so severe that it is impossible for the shroud to record the image of an actual human body—unless it was a very seriously pathological person with a brain the size of a Homo erectus.

As well as researching issues including the evolution of brain size, I am an artist who produces 2-D representational works (as opposed to 3-D or abstract pieces), and as such I understand that aspiringly realistic flat art is always a visual illusion based on a set of visual tricks. . . .

And there is another point - a

Quote:

more subtle yet serious defect. In the front image the hands are used to prudishly cover the genitalia, with the elbows bowed significantly out to the side, and the shoulders spread out to the side in a normal manner. Judging from the rear image the elbows were not in contact with the surface that the alleged corpse was resting on. This arrangement may look natural, but it is not and is an artistic illusion. In order for a person to cover their genitalia in the manner of the shroud figure, the shoulders need to be hunched forward a little, and the arms strongly extended towards the crotch, with the elbows tucked in. This does not match the nonhunched shoulders, and is not possible for a corpse. Again, get down on the floor and try to match the pose of the image. If you try to be a relaxed corpse it is impossible; your elbows will drop to the floor and your hands cannot then reach the groin. Nor would it be feasible to get a body in rigor mortis, which begins to set in three hours after death, to assume the posture seen in the shroud. Only if the dead body were supple and tightly bound to hunch the shoulders and extend the arms would the hands be able to reach so far down.

Dogfish · 05-06-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The SecularWeb has just published a note on the Shroud: The Shroud of Turin: The Great Gothic Art Fraud — Because If It's Real the Brain of Jesus Was the Size of a Protohuman's!

Quote:

This note is intended to describe why, from an artistic and anatomical perspective, the shroud image is an embarrassingly obvious fraud committed by a Gothic artist following the standard conventions of his time. The artistic errors are so severe that it is impossible for the shroud to record the image of an actual human body—unless it was a very seriously pathological person with a brain the size of a Homo erectus.

As well as researching issues including the evolution of brain size, I am an artist who produces 2-D representational works (as opposed to 3-D or abstract pieces), and as such I understand that aspiringly realistic flat art is always a visual illusion based on a set of visual tricks. . . .

And there is another point - a

Quote:

more subtle yet serious defect. In the front image the hands are used to prudishly cover the genitalia, with the elbows bowed significantly out to the side, and the shoulders spread out to the side in a normal manner. Judging from the rear image the elbows were not in contact with the surface that the alleged corpse was resting on. This arrangement may look natural, but it is not and is an artistic illusion. In order for a person to cover their genitalia in the manner of the shroud figure, the shoulders need to be hunched forward a little, and the arms strongly extended towards the crotch, with the elbows tucked in. This does not match the nonhunched shoulders, and is not possible for a corpse. Again, get down on the floor and try to match the pose of the image. If you try to be a relaxed corpse it is impossible; your elbows will drop to the floor and your hands cannot then reach the groin. Nor would it be feasible to get a body in rigor mortis, which begins to set in three hours after death, to assume the posture seen in the shroud. Only if the dead body were supple and tightly bound to hunch the shoulders and extend the arms would the hands be able to reach so far down.

Hey, god could get into any pose he wants. I hear he's bitchin' in Yoga class!

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

04-21-2010, 01:01 PM	#52
Huon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Bordeaux France Posts: 2,796	Was it impossible to find male human blood in Champagne around 1357 ?

04-21-2010, 01:17 PM	#53
semiopen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Hillsborough, NJ Posts: 3,551	The actual stains are not clearly blood. That's what Tryon (and perhaps Merriwether say). If they are not blood, the shroud is almost certainly a hoax. The AB blood is of some importance because the Sudarium_of_Oviedo has also been claimed to have AB blood. If this test was also wrong, as seems almost certain, that odd coincidence is explained. As a previous poster suggested but did not support, it is possible that a standard test on ancient stains tends to give a false result of AB whether or not the stain is even blood. It is also true, as Huon suggests, that the existence of blood on the shroud does not confirm its authenticity, but apparently we are not at that point yet.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.