Turin Shroud, enjoy...

[Grumpage]

So, the Catholic Church is about to be pestered yet again by scientists obsessed with the Shroud. Is there no end to their meddling? Why can't they let the Church enjoy it's relics in peace? Why doesn’t the Church simply say, enough is enough?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 596856.ece

Authenticity isn't the real issue here, it's one of belief, in this instance the far out form of belief known as religious faith. Faith does not require facts and facts do not require faith. The scientists are simply digging a hole to nowhere. I’m sure they know this and so does the Church. But, in a peculiar sort of way, they seem to like each other’s company. The dance continues. It’s fun. The rest of us can only sit back and enjoy - what more can we ask of science or religion?

[Minimalist]

I do find it somewhat amusing that the church itself has never been out in front leading the cheers for the shroud.

It's almost as if they know its a fake....just like all the other relics that they keep around to impress the sheep.

[Digit]

Having an interest in just about everything I would like to see a date for the shroud that all agree on. If that is achieved, and the date is early AD, that still does not establish the ID of the victim.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

3 seaparate c14 labs came back with dates in a 50 year range in the 14th century.

http://www.skepdic.com/shroud.html

The suggestion that the 1532 Chambery fire changed the date of the cloth is ludicrous. Samples for C-dating are routinely and completely burned to CO2 as part of a well-tested purification procedure. The suggestions that modern biological contaminants were sufficient to modernize the date are also ridiculous. A weight of 20th century carbon equaling nearly two times the weight of the Shroud carbon itself would be required to change a 1st century date to the 14th century (see Carbon 14 graph). Besides this, the linen cloth samples were very carefully cleaned before analysis at each of the C-dating laboratories.*

The believers will keep insisting that science is "wrong" because it doesn't substantiate their myths. I've heard this line of reasoning before.

From you-know-who.

[Digit]

There have been serious suggestions over here Min that contamination was the cause of the late dates. I've no idea, just mentioning it.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

Dig, when science proves them wrong they have to come up with a reason why "science" is wrong and they are right.

They make up some marvelously inventive tales why "science" can't prove Adam and Eve or Noah's Ark, too.

I was once involved in a debate elsewhere about the biblical prophecy that Tyre would be destroyed and never re-built. In spite of the fact that Tyre is today the 4th largest city in Lebanon and has been re-built many times they still insist that Nebuchadnezzar destroyed it utterly even though Alexander the Great came along 3 centuries later and actually did capture the town....which is more than Nebby ever managed.

In the course of that debate as they were parsing words and splitting hairs one guy mentioned that evangelicals were like god's shyster lawyer trying to get him off on a technicality. True enough....but Tyre is still there.

[Digit]

Quite. So with an imagination that borders on the bizarre I wonder what would happen if fresh dating came with 1600hrs 25 April AD 40, 'cos it still doesn't identify the victim. Apart from anything Jesus was one of three crucified that day apparently.
The arguments would be fascinating.

Roy.

[Minimalist]

I wonder what would happen if fresh dating came with 1600hrs 25 April AD 40, 'cos it still doesn't identify the victim.

Are you familiar with the phrase...."close enough for government work?"

[Digit]

Pretty well Min.

Roy.