Freethought & Rationalism Archive

leonarde · 06-13-2003, 10:29 AM

Yeah, the incompetent forgerer theory. But if he's so incompetent,
how come we're still marvelling at the other aspects of his handiwork?

Cheers!

leonarde · 06-13-2003, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Wouldn't any coin imprints on the shroud, if it were authentic, actually be mirror images of the actual coin?

Do you mean "mirror images" or "photo images"? Photo images have the reversal of left and right.

Cheers!

Arken · 06-13-2003, 10:34 AM

I remember seeing Joe Nickell of CSICOP give a demonstration about the biggest problem with the idea that the shroud could be authentic which should have been enough to convince anyone.

If you cover a three-dimensional human head with a shroud and then color shroud so that the shape of the head is revealed on it, when you flatten the shroud, the head appears extremely wide and distorted. Common logic should tell anyone this just thinking about it considering the fact that our heads would be the same way if they were flattened.

However, if you put an almost two-dimensional bas relief under the shroud and color the shroud, it retains the normal head proportions. Therefore, unless the image on the shroud does not work the way the rest of the universe does and/or Jesus had a really, really narrow and weird-shaped head, it is undoubtedly a forgery.

Gooch's dad · 06-13-2003, 10:34 AM

I meant what I said--mirror images. The vague hint of a crook I see in the shroud image is in the same orientation as the coin, and not reversed (which is what it should be if the coin made a transfer imprint on the shroud).

leonarde · 06-13-2003, 10:51 AM

I'm not playing dumb or anything but I'm having trouble following you: a transfer image, if I know what that is (I think of putting a very thin handkerchief over the face of a quarter), means--------and correct me if I'm wrong----- that concave and convex are reversed (ie the protrusions from the coin surface cause the side of the handkerchief facing the coin to become concave (ie recessed) but the OTHER side of the handkerchief protrudes (just like the letters on the face of the coin). Am I warm?
(But even if I'm not warm, this really gets into the manner of image formation: it is theorized by "Shroudies" that the manner of image formation-----WHATEVER IT IS----- is the same for the body image and the coins (assuming the coin impressions are real).

Cheers!

keyser_soze · 06-13-2003, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Arken
I remember seeing Joe Nickell of CSICOP give a demonstration about the biggest problem with the idea that the shroud could be authentic which should have been enough to convince anyone.

If you cover a three-dimensional human head with a shroud and then color shroud so that the shape of the head is revealed on it, when you flatten the shroud, the head appears extremely wide and distorted. Common logic should tell anyone this just thinking about it considering the fact that our heads would be the same way if they were flattened.

However, if you put an almost two-dimensional bas relief under the shroud and color the shroud, it retains the normal head proportions. Therefore, unless the image on the shroud does not work the way the rest of the universe does and/or Jesus had a really, really narrow and weird-shaped head, it is undoubtedly a forgery.

The obvious rarely sinks into the mind of the irrational person. To be honest it looks like a bas etching of the tomb cover of a european man, circa 14th century...Unless one doesn't take into account that white hippies were pretty non-existant in the 1st century. There's really no point though, Leonarde is just trying to drum up business for his particular brand of blindness.

mfaber · 06-13-2003, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by leonarde
Yeah, the incompetent forgerer theory. But if he's so incompetent,
how come we're still marvelling at the other aspects of his handiwork?

Cheers!

I do NOT "marvel" at this forger's handiwork. The only thing I 'marvel" at is the lengths some people will go to believe that this bit of medieval fakery is the burial shroud of an alleged virgin-born, miracle-working, back-from-the-dead demigod.

leonarde · 06-13-2003, 05:24 PM

Quote:

I do NOT "marvel" at this forger's handiwork.

My! What a surprise!

Cheers!

Koyaanisqatsi · 06-14-2003, 12:16 AM

Sorry for the aside folks, but it was recently brought to my attention that leonarde was under the paranoid delusion that I was, among others, mfarber and I think two other people (in another recent thread about the shroud; now closed, so I couldn't comment there).

As any mod or admin (whoever holds the keys) can freely attest at your leisure, leonarde, I have never used a "sockpuppet" and never will.

Indeed, if it's not too much trouble, I'll have an admin send you an email testifying to that fact.

Just so you know leonarde that the people who will devestate every shred of your argument here the way I did in that 18 pager will not be me so you can't use that freakish, bizarre and disturbing evasion the way you did in that other recent thread; where, for some reason, you also posted a link to the thread where I (and others) handed you your walking papers.

But please bring up the 38 arterial wounds crap all over again! That way you can derail this thread too and such stupidity can likewise be buried in the recent past along with your beloved Shroud of Red Herring.

I now return you to the leonarde show, already in progress....

leonarde · 06-14-2003, 10:38 AM

Quote:

38 arterial wounds crap

? ????Yes, it was crap. But crap that:

1) you invented on page 5 of the 18 pager.

2) you maintained as a major reason the Shroud was a 'fake' (this from pages 5 to 12) that is until

3) others (including but not limited to Asha'man) called on me to 'explain' those 'arterial wounds' (if I remember correctly the number you invented was 34 NOT 38).

4) which I finally did on page 12 by reading back on the thread and discovering your invention.

Cheers!

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

06-13-2003, 10:29 AM	#11
leonarde Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: North America Posts: 1,603	Yeah, the incompetent forgerer theory. But if he's so incompetent, how come we're still marvelling at the other aspects of his handiwork? Cheers!

06-13-2003, 10:34 AM	#13
Arken Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: North Hollywood, CA Posts: 6,303	I remember seeing Joe Nickell of CSICOP give a demonstration about the biggest problem with the idea that the shroud could be authentic which should have been enough to convince anyone. If you cover a three-dimensional human head with a shroud and then color shroud so that the shape of the head is revealed on it, when you flatten the shroud, the head appears extremely wide and distorted. Common logic should tell anyone this just thinking about it considering the fact that our heads would be the same way if they were flattened. However, if you put an almost two-dimensional bas relief under the shroud and color the shroud, it retains the normal head proportions. Therefore, unless the image on the shroud does not work the way the rest of the universe does and/or Jesus had a really, really narrow and weird-shaped head, it is undoubtedly a forgery.

06-13-2003, 10:34 AM	#14
Gooch's dad Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Madison WI USA Posts: 3,508	I meant what I said--mirror images. The vague hint of a crook I see in the shroud image is in the same orientation as the coin, and not reversed (which is what it should be if the coin made a transfer imprint on the shroud).

06-13-2003, 10:51 AM	#15
leonarde Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: North America Posts: 1,603	I'm not playing dumb or anything but I'm having trouble following you: a transfer image, if I know what that is (I think of putting a very thin handkerchief over the face of a quarter), means--------and correct me if I'm wrong----- that concave and convex are reversed (ie the protrusions from the coin surface cause the side of the handkerchief facing the coin to become concave (ie recessed) but the OTHER side of the handkerchief protrudes (just like the letters on the face of the coin). Am I warm? (But even if I'm not warm, this really gets into the manner of image formation: it is theorized by "Shroudies" that the manner of image formation-----WHATEVER IT IS----- is the same for the body image and the coins (assuming the coin impressions are real). Cheers!

06-14-2003, 12:16 AM	#19
Koyaanisqatsi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Yes, I have dyslexia. Sue me. Posts: 6,508	Sorry for the aside folks, but it was recently brought to my attention that leonarde was under the paranoid delusion that I was, among others, mfarber and I think two other people (in another recent thread about the shroud; now closed, so I couldn't comment there). As any mod or admin (whoever holds the keys) can freely attest at your leisure, leonarde, I have never used a "sockpuppet" and never will. Indeed, if it's not too much trouble, I'll have an admin send you an email testifying to that fact. Just so you know leonarde that the people who will devestate every shred of your argument here the way I did in that 18 pager will not be me so you can't use that freakish, bizarre and disturbing evasion the way you did in that other recent thread; where, for some reason, you also posted a link to the thread where I (and others) handed you your walking papers. But please bring up the 38 arterial wounds crap all over again! That way you can derail this thread too and such stupidity can likewise be buried in the recent past along with your beloved Shroud of Red Herring. I now return you to the leonarde show, already in progress....

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.