Evidence for God from Science

Philip wrote:

Bip wrote: "The most fascinating aspect of this video in my opinion are the blood clots .
Remember they are anatomically perfect , unsmeared and unbroken . When you wrap a bloodied body with a burial shroud it firms a light bond with the body . Once This happens , if grave robbers steal the body off the burial shroud what happens to the blood clots ? Well they either smear if they haven't fully dried or if they have dried they are broken . Also if the man of the shroud just suddenly gets up and walks off the shroud the blood clots will also be either smeared or broken . There is no evidence of smearing or the breaking if any of the blood clots , which means that the man of the shroud got off that shroud in an unnatural way ."

Bip, I'm so glad you emphasized these points about the unbroken, unsmeared contact points of the blood. This also well debunks any notion that a corpse was somehow wrapped and unwrapped to produce the Shroud. It also eliminates all possibility that ANY paint-like substances or liquid processes could have been used to create it, as they would have produced broken apart or smeared evidence as well. Really, if this had been a mere artist's clever fake from the medieval period, then it would have been instantly exposed as such. And let's not forget, this STURP team isn't just a bunch of Sunday School teachers eager to validate their much-believed-in relic, these are scientists of renowned expertise in their respective fields: The team has included a nuclear physicist, thermal chemists from Los Alamos National Laboratory, one from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, a biophysicist, an optical physicist, electric power experts, and a forensic pathologist. These guys are no dummies. And they weren't all Christians, either - several for which disproving the Shroud would have been more than satisfying. Not to mention their reputations were on the line. Not one would have wanted to risk their professional credibility by validating and obvious or highly dubious, FAKED artifact.

The primary goal of STURP was to test the hypothesis that the Shroud's image was
painted, as claimed by Bishop d'Arcis in 1389. If it had been painted, some colored material had
to be added to the cloth, but the colored material would have gone through the fire of 1532. The
pigments and vehicles would have suffered changes in response to the heating, the pyrolysis
products, a nd the water used to put the fire out. No changes in image color could be observed at
scorch margins.
We tested all pigments and media that were known to have been used before 1532 by
heating them on linen up to the temperature of char formation. All of the materials were changed
by heat and/or the chemically reducing and reactive pyrolysis products. Some Medieval painting
materials become water soluble, and they would have moved with the water that diffused
through parts of the cloth as the fire was being extinguished. Observations of the Shroud in 1978
showed that nothing in the image moved with the water.

The Shroud was observed by visible and ultraviolet spectrometry, infrared spectrometry, x-ray fluorescence spectrometry, and thermography. Later observations were made by pyrolysis- mass-spectrometry, lasermicroprobe Raman analyses, and microchemical testing. No evidence for pigments or media was found. Your eye sees colors when the surface absorbs some wavelengths of light and reflects others. A red surface absorbs all visible wavelengths other than red. Each chemical compound absorbs wavelengths that are characteristic of its chemical structure. The best way to determine the properties of a color is by measuring its spectrum. Reflectance spectrometry was one of the most important contributions of the STURP observations. The reflectance spectra in the visible range for the image, blood, and hematite are shown in the figure. The image could not have been painted with hematite or any of the other known pigments. The spectrum of the image color does not show any specific features: it gradually changes through the spectrum. This proves that it is composed of many different light-absorbing chemical structures. It has the properties of a dehydrated carbohydrate.

This possibility has been discounted in the past by Raymond Rogers, a member of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (Sturp) which examined the fabric in the 1970s, who said: "If any form of radiation degraded the cellulose of the linen fibers to produce the image color, it would have had to penetrate the entire diameter of a fiber in order to color its back surface", but that the centres of the fibres are unmarked.

Ray Rogers' 2002 claim that:

"If any form of radiation (thermal, electromagnetic, or particle) degraded the cellulose of the linen fibers to produce the image color, it would have had to penetrate the entire diameter of a fiber in order to color its back surface. Some lower fibers are colored, requiring more penetration. Radiation that penetrated the entire 10-15-μm-diameter of a fiber would certainly color the walls of the medulla. All image fibers show color on their surfaces but not in the medullas." (Rogers, R. & Arnoldi, A., 2002, "Scientific Method Applied to the Shroud of Turin - A Review")

is simply wrong! If Chivers bothered to Google translate the ENEA report and then read it, he would discover that it explains why the high-energy, narrow frequency, ultraviolet light of the ENEA experiments coloured only the "outer skin is called the primary cell wall" of the flax fibrils which is made of hemicellulose, while leaving the "inner (medulla) of pure cellulose" unaffected:

"Each linen thread is made up of about 200 elementary fibers having a cylindrical structure with an average length of 30 mm and average diameter of 20 micrometers, called fibrils. Each linen fiber has an inner (medulla) of pure cellulose, and a thin (0.2 μm [micrometers]) external film composed of hemicellulose, cellulose and other minor components. This outer skin is called the primary cell wall. The ... color of the extremely superficial image on the Shroud was formed by an unknown process that caused oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the structure polysaccharide of flax fibers, to produce a conjugated carbonyl group as a chromophore. In other words, the color is the result of a process of accelerated aging of linen. [There are] two different chemical transitions probably involved in forming the image on the linen of the Shroud. .... There are two possible transitions ... that convert the cellulose and hemicellulose in a chromophore consisting of carbonyl groups married after undergoing processes of oxidation and dehydration. The double bonds ... are the main responsible for the yellow image of the fibers of the Shroud of Turin. ... The different thicknesses of staining obtained with lasers and excimer XeCl ARF ... can be due to different wavelength. In fact, a shorter penetrates less into the tissue and consequently the energy absorbed per unit volume is greater.

However ... there [is] only a 11% difference in absorption between the flax 0.193 and 0.308 μm ...Then you must find an additional mechanism to explain the different thicknesses of light penetration fibrils and in different color, ie yellow or yellow-sepia after irradiation to 0.193 μm -or light brown after irradiation at 308 μm. This mechanism could be promoted by additional absorption band at 0.260 μm below the ketone carbonyl groups ... that promote yellowing of the hemicellulose in primary cell wall. In other words, the VUV radiation at 0.193 μm is absorbed by the ketone carbonyl and leads to photolytic degradation of hemicellulose, causing the dissociation of molecular bonds that promotes the chemical reaction ... At the macroscopic level, such reactions produce the yellow-like Shroud ... Note that the UV radiation at 0.308 μm is too long to fit in the absorption band of carbonyl ketone, while it can be absorbed by the aldehyde groups ... Thus, the UV radiation is not able to begin the process with many steps that leads to yellowing of the above-described cellulose and hemicellulose." (pp.19-20)

That is, it is the chemical structure of the hemicellulose of the flax fibril's "outer skin" or "primary cell wall" that absorbs the energy of "VUV radiation at 0.193 μm [which] leads to photolytic degradation of hemicellulose, causing the dissociation of molecular bonds that promotes the chemical reaction" and "At the macroscopic level, such reactions produce the yellow-like Shroud." The flax fibril's "inner (medulla) of pure cellulose" does not absorb the VUV energy and therefore its chemical structure is not changed so does not change colour.

There are many hypotheses about how the images could have been made, and they have each come in and out of favour. Without wanting to be too cocky, when the ENEA scientists say that radiation is the "only" way the image could have been made, I imagine that many of their fellow researchers will say it's the only way that they managed it.

There are indeed, "many hypotheses about how the images could have been made, and they have each come ... out of favour"! That is because, as the ENEA report itself states, none of them until now had been able to reproduce "one of the most distinctive features of the Shroud image" it is "extremely thin, one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter":

The Shroud image is "extremely thin, one-fifth of a thousandth of a millimeter ... corresponding to the thickness of the primary cell wall of a single linen fiber" (pp.4,8). Clearly no medieval or earlier forger could make even a single mark on linen that thin, let alone create the image of a man, front and back, on a linen sheet, of that extreme thinness.


•The "total power of the VUV [vacuum ultraviolet] radiation required to instantly color the surface of linen corresponding to a human body of medium height is equal to 34 thousand billion watts" and "this power can not be produced by any light source VUV built to date (the most powerful available on the market come to several billion watts)" (p.22).



•It would require "a battery of ten thousand excimer lasers to accurately reproduce the image on the Shroud" (p.22). That is, instantaneously. And, although the report does not says it, they would have to be directed by a computer which followed a digitized map of the Shroud.


The implication, of course, is that a divine light shone when Jesus's body was resurrected, and that this emitted a burst of high-frequency photons which burned an image on the cloth around him.

The implication is indeed, that "when Jesus's body was resurrected, and that this emitted a burst of high-frequency photons which burned an image on the cloth around him." As Ian Wilson pointed out as far back as 1978, the evidence was pointing to the Shroud image being "a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection":

"Even from the limited available information, a hypothetical glimpse of the power operating at the moment of creation of the Shroud's image may be ventured. In the darkness of the Jerusalem tomb the dead body of Jesus lay, unwashed, covered in blood, on a stone slab. Suddenly, there is a burst of mysterious power from it. In that instant the blood dematerializes, dissolved perhaps by the flash, while its image and that of the body becomes indelibly fused onto the cloth, preserving for posterity a literal `snapshot' of the Resurrection." (Wilson, I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, p.210).


http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/20 ... e-get.html

Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:

1over137 wrote:Please, express yourself in minichat.Would be pitty to derail this nice thread of Bippy.

Yes, you are right, Doctor. I won't do it again as long as that Australian tea drinker keeps the peace.

I'm at page 38 of this topic. I have to commend Bippy for being very patient with that Tetelesti guy, the one with the Israeli flag avatar.

FL

bippy123 wrote:One atheist got so desperate he resorted to casting a spell on me

Byblos wrote:

bippy123 wrote:One atheist got so desperate he resorted to casting a spell on me

Now that's rich.

Philip wrote:Hey, Bip, maybe you could start your own Discovery Channel Show: "SHROUD Myth-Busters"

But I would start the show with this video for a good laugh

Philip wrote:

But I would start the show with this video for a good laugh

Well, Bip, I think I know what that "nothing" that Dawkins nonetheless says must be "SOMETHING pretty mysterious" that had "to give rise to the origin of the universe" is. And although his mumbo-jumbo and meaningless/nonsensical assertions are truly laughable, give a man a PhD, a British accent, and a way with weaving words, let him write a few books filled with often-theoretical, evidentially bankrupt, immensely implausible conjecture, and there will always be some who will think him absolutely brilliant. I guess at least his ridiculous assertions are more entertaining than some uneducated dullard who just plainly admits, "I just don't know how the universe began," if not quite so honest.

PaulSacramento wrote:From some research that I have done, it seems tome that the issue of radiation is very crucial here.
I think that there may be something to the reason why the high priest would adorn himself in gold ( especially the head and chest area) when He had to go into the holiest of holies and why Moses' face was shinning after He saw God, why it was warned that any man that sees Gods "face" would die, why Jesus' transfiguration and His "son of man" imagery states that He shines and so forth and that is the intense radiation that spiritual beings of that caliber ( God) give off.
I think that the moment His body was transformed from mortal flesh to resurrected "flesh" that the intense radiation was so great that it embedded his image on the shroud as it was and I also think there MAY have been some distortion of sorts too.
I think that eventually we may find out the right TYPE of radiation and that it will be the "founding energy" of the universe that came from God.

The Shroud as a snapshot of Jesus’ Resurrection.
Ralph Graeber, a nuclear engineer connected to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission’s laboratory in Lemont, IL, has written: “To space-age scientists, it is quite obvious that images [on the Shroud] were formed by radiation processes.” It’s as if “the linen was scorched by the Nova,”69 a sudden, very bright flash of light. Most scientists and other Shroud researchers now believe that some form of light or heat (radiation) caused the images on the Shroud—or as Turin physicist Luigi Gongella describes it, “a burst of collimated [parallel] rays of radiant energy.”70 Giles Carter, a professor emeritus of Eastern Michigan University and a specialist with X-rays, first pointed out (1984) that finger bones were visible on the Shroud negatives. Then the American physicist John Jackson and physician Alan Whanger noted part of a forehead skull, and the surgeon August Accetta found traces of a hidden thumb and of teeth on the right side.71


British nuclear physicist Kitty Little (1978) noted that the light that illuminated the Shroud body must have come from inside the body, since no outside light source appears present.72 Light either travels in a straight line (like sunlight) or extends outward from its source (as from a light bulb), but the light which produced the image on the Shroud cloth seems neither kind, of outside light. Instead its forms seem impressed and delicately nuanced by light from another dimension.73 Earlier, Little (in general research) had radiated different cellulose fibers at a nuclear reactor at Harwell, England, and noted that proteins and alpha particles caused a straw-yellow discoloration at 40o Centigrade (104o Fahrenheit). Since these particles have a short range in air and in solids, they deposit their energy only on the topmost fibers of the cloth; and over time an oxidized, dehydrated and conjugated effect would produce an image discoloration.74

John Jackson (1991), in his “cloth collapse theory,” held that while the body of the Shroud man dematerialized, the cloth fell through the body region while electromagnetic radiation photosensitized the body image onto the cloth (which later darkened), recording various skeletal and other hidden body parts. He suggested that this is the only hypothesis that can explain all of the characteristics of the Shroud cloth and image—although he would not speculate beyond this what caused the body to disappear.75

1over137 wrote:I do not know yet whether it was mentioned in this thread, but here you can see the shroud youselves even maybe in 3D with 3D glasses. You tell me what you see as I was born such that I do not see 3D. My eyes do not cooperate.