The shroud of turin, is it real or just a really sophisticated

>>2782215
Pretty sure that scientific research has concluded via carbon dating that its age corresponds roughly to the time Jesus was supposed to live. They also found some resin/pollen that's characteristic of middle eastern plants IRC. As to if it was really the historic jesus christ or just some other guy is anyone guess.

>>2782215
Jesus had a napkin on his head, which was distinct than his linen clothes
ergo turin shroud is fake

>>2782215
>sophisticated forgery?
Yes, thats what the conclusive scientific report said, a forgery from the medieval.
>>2782229
>Pretty sure that scientific research has concluded via carbon dating that its age corresponds roughly to the time Jesus was supposed to live
Either you are an idiot or a liar, because all serious reports tell different.

>>2782229
OP here, as much as i've looked at here's what i've got
>Anatomy is all wrong
>jesus had a seperate shroud on his head
>image projection is wrong
>blood doesn't have the correct color (it's supposed to be brown because that's how blood ages, but it has fading red colour instead)

>>2782234
>>2782248
Here's a better question, how the fuck was it drawn?

>>2782248
>In 1988, scientists at three separate laboratories dated samples from the Shroud to a range of AD 1260–1390, which coincides with the first certain appearance of the shroud in the 1350s and is much later than the burial of Jesus

File: sudarium_oviedo_light-1024x656.jpg (158KB, 1024x656px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1024x656px

What about the Sudarium of Oviedo?

>>2782256
>Here's a better question, how the fuck was it drawn?
Who fucking cares, it was carbon dated to be a high medieval fake by 3 independent top universities.

>>2782266
Also carbon dated to the year 700, so fake again.

File: CIYvAwHWIAAqLZH.png (248KB, 418x457px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 418x457px

What is the "scientific" explanation for the shroud of Turin? Did Jesus just exude radiation or something?

>>2782268
>I don't like knowledge

it was proven a late medieval fake years ago

File: jesus-resurrected-ray-downing.jpg (60KB, 707x900px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 707x900px

>It is often mentioned that the first certain historical record dates from 1353 or 1357.[5][34] However the presence of the Turin Shroud in Lirey, France, is only undoubtedly attested in 1390 when Bishop Pierre d'Arcis wrote a memorandum to Antipope Clement VII, stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed.[8][35]

I want it to be real, but its probably fake desu. Jesus died around 33 A. D. Why would itthe shroud disappear for all that time and suddenly re-appear in 1353 Western Europe? It makes no sense and is prob a Medieval era creation.

File: 300px-Rorschach1.jpg (10KB, 300x196px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 300x196px

>>2782266
What about this Demon from before the Flood?

>>2782280
That Jesus had kidney failure causing an accumulation of urea in the blood. This led to metabolic acidosis, and the acids exuded through his skin and stained the shroud along with his blood.

>>2782266
This one is more interesting because it's history actually does go back to the middle east, but it's still probably a fake.

>>2782280
>What is the "scientific" explanation for the shroud of Turin?
There is none. There are some theories, educated guesses, but really, we have no idea.

We know by now that it's legit, though. And this is a huge mindfuck to everyone.

>>2782298
It was already tested and it's from around 0 AD. There ware some party that had been repaired in the Middle Ages and some "scientists" used those to "prove" that the Shroud is fake.

>>2782448
that test is the only actual test. there are no "tests" proving its from two thousand years ago.

>>2782448
wew lad

>>2782448
>We know by now that it's legit
read>>2782256

>>2782215
It's a sophisticated forgery. The man who forged it admitted to it.

It's easy to tell that it's a forgery. It's a full body image, front and back. It's unfolded at the crown of his head.

If you fold it back over, you can see that the model would have had to be less than an inch thick for the images to match.

A modern scientist demonstrated how easily it was done. He used ochre on linen, then baked it all off in an oven. It left the same kind of residual image.

As a Christian, this never fooled me for a second. The bible clearly states that Jesus' face was covered with a separate napkin, and that napkin was found folded up where he lay, while the body wrappings were completely intact.

This is the opposite of this shroud of Turin.

And let's not forget the marketing aspect of this; enough "fragments of the holy cross" have been sold to rebuild Noah's ark.

>>2782256
A modern scientist recreated it with ochre and baking it in an oven.

File: aa2a4e78d49e572466194097383c709c658204f852b4312e511422e649b210fd.png (4MB, 1292x8757px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1292x8757px

>>2782215

>>2782448

Hey, looks like a certain Æutist came back to town

>>2782938
Half of the shit in your pic was already discussed and debunked here

>>2783045
Maybe in your mind.

>>2783072

>>2782874
>>2782880
>>2782256
>>2782234

>>2783081
see
>>2783072

>>2783086
I'm sorry that you can't read.

>>2782945
Shroud Guy, or as I like to call him, Brick Wall, is a different guy than him/her.

I remember this reference from father Ted lol