/soy/ - Soyjaks

>>15535875 (OP)
>Posted fake artifact award

no, I'm white

>>15535938
worst bait ever award

>>15535949
Evendoe it is not bait, it has been proved that the tissue is from the middle ages when all euromutts got obsessed with cristcuck artifacts. That is not actually the real image of Jesus.

>>15535956
I do not look like this

Christ VVON

>>15535992
Where is he now then?

>>15535976
There are 14 indicators for the date for the Shroud, 13 of which are consistent with the time of Jesus. Only the C14 date is inconsistent with the time of Jesus. These dating techniques are summarized below:
1. In 1988, samples were cut from a corner of the Shroud for carbon dating at three laboratories. The results of the 16 measurements were interpreted to mean that the Shroud dated to 1260-1390.
2. The Hungarian Pray Codex or Manuscript is historically dated to 1192 to 1195 AD. It includes a painted drawing that must have been copied from the Shroud of Turin based on the pattern of burn holes on the painting and on the Shroud, so the Shroud must have existed in 1192-1195 AD.
3. It is believed that the spinning wheel was invented in Asia by the 11th century and had spread to Europe by the 13th century. Since the Shroud is made of hand-spun thread, the threads that compose the Shroud were probably spun before the 12th century.
4. The international standard of the market place at the time of Jesus was the Assyrian cubit which was equal to about 21.6 inches (54.9 cm). The dimensions of the Shroud in this unit is very close to 8 by 2 cubits, indicating it was made in ancient times when the cubit was used as a unit of measurement.
5. Ancient coins that contain the same image as the Shroud of Turin go back to about 675 AD, thus showing that the Shroud must have existed prior to about 675 AD.
6. The face cloth of Jesus is believed to be in Oviedo, Spain, arriving there in 840 AD. It is called the Sudarium of Oviedo. Similarity of the blood stain on the Sudarium and the Shroud mean that they covered the same body, indicates that the Shroud can also be dated back to at least 840 AD.
7. Ancient paintings and other works of art that contain the same image as the Shroud of Turin go back to about 550 AD.
8. The image on the Shroud is that of a crucified man. Specifics of this image indicates that it was made at a time when there was current knowledge of Roman Crucifixion, which was outlawed in 337 AD. Thus, the image on the Shroud was probably made earlier than 337 AD.
9. Galatians 3:1 (~ 47 to 56 AD) indicates the believers in Galatia were shown something that “clearly” or “publicly portrayed” “Jesus Christ … as crucified” (NIV & NASB). They had seen it with their “very eyes” (NIV). A very reasonable explanation is that they saw Jesus’ burial shroud containing his blood and possibly his image.
10. There is a 3.5-inch wide piece of linen that is sewn onto the main piece of the Shroud. The stitch used to connect this side piece is a unique stitch, most similar to a stitch on a piece of cloth found at Masada, which was destroyed in 73 to 74 AD.
11. The image on the Shroud is that of a naked man who was crucified exactly as the Bible says that Jesus was crucified. Many evidences indicate that it is most reasonable to believe that the image was made by his dead body. Jesus probably died either in 30 or 33 AD, so that the Shroud must also date to 30 or 33 AD.
12. A photograph of the face on the Shroud taken by professional photographer Giuseppe Enrie in 1931 indicates a possible coin over one eye. It has been identified as a Roman Lepton minted by Pontius Pilate in 29 to 32 AD. This evidence is tentative.
13. Giulio Fanti developed three different types of physical tests to determine how flax fibers change with age. When these tests were applied to the Shroud they gave an average date of 33 BC ± 250.
14. Fibers from the Shroud show damage from sources of natural background radiation similar to that found on the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are dated to about 250 BC to 70 AD. Thus, the Shroud should date to about this same period.

>>15536076
Results of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) in 1978 supported the authenticity of the Shroud, but this was brought into question by carbon dating. In 1988, samples were cut from the corner of the cloth and sent for carbon dating at three laboratories in Tucson, Zurich, and Oxford. Carbon dating is done by measuring the C14 to C12 ratio of samples, and the date is implied from the ratio. The three laboratories made 16 measurements of the C14 to C12 ratio. The average date from the 16 measurements at the three laboratories was 1260 ± 31 AD, which produced a range of 1260 to 1390 AD when corrected for the variable amount of C14 in the atmosphere. This 1260-1390 range was claimed to be a two-sigma range, which means that there should be a 95% probability that the true date falls within this 1260-1390 range. However, subsequent statistical analysis of the 16 measured values by multiple individuals found strong evidence the variation in the laboratory’s measurements was not only due to random measurement errors but very probably also due to something that could have altered the measured dates from the first century to the Middle Ages. In statistical analysis terminology, this “something” is called a systematic error or bias. Since it cannot be determined from the measurements how much they were affected by this systematic bias, the conclusion in Damon that the Shroud dates to 1260 to 1390 AD should be rejected. The evidence can be summarized as follows:

· Due to its unique characteristics, the image could not have been made between 1260 and 1390 AD because the technology did not exist. The technology to form this image still does not exist.
· 13 other date indicators are consistent with a first century date for the Shroud and inconsistent with the carbon date of 1260 to 1390 AD. This is discussed in the previous section.
· Dates from the three laboratories don’t agree with each other. The average dates from the laboratories in Tucson (1303.5 ± 17.2) and Oxford (1200.8 ± 30.7) are statistically different (difference = 102.7 ± 35.2) from each other at the 102.7 / 35.2 = 2.9 sigma level, which is above the normal 2.0 sigma acceptance level.
· Plotting the average values from the three laboratories indicates there is a gradient or slope to the carbon dates from the three laboratories of about 36 years per cm of distance from the bottom of the Shroud. This indicates that something altered the date measurements as a function of (depending on) the distance of the original location of the samples from the bottom of the cloth. Nuclear analysis computer calculations indicate this slope in the carbon dates is about the same as would result from new C14 produced on the Shroud by neutron absorption resulting from the distribution of neutrons in the tomb if they were emitted from within the body.
· When a Chi-squared statistical analysis is performed on the 16 measurements and their uncertainties, the C14 date measurements have only a 1.4% probability of being consistent with the uncertainties. This indicates about a 98% probability that something altered the measurements. This something, or bias, changed the measurements by about 36 years per cm as stated above.
· The date of 1260 to 1390 AD for the Shroud was based on ignoring half the data, i.e. all measurement uncertainties. It is not legitimate to simply ignore all the measurement uncertainties: 1) they were obtained using the same equipment and procedures as the measurements, 2) they were reasonably consistent for all laboratories, and 3) they were reasonably consistent with the uncertainties for the three standards that were run at the same time as the Shroud samples.

What altered the measured dates? Evidence indicates the image was formed by a burst of radiation emitted from within the body. Atoms that make up the body are composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons. If neutrons were included in this burst of radiation, a small fraction of them would have been absorbed in the trace amount of N14 in the threads to create new C14 in the Shroud by the [N14 + neutron à C14 + proton] reaction. To shift the C14 date for the samples from about 30-33 AD (the death of Jesus) to 1260 AD requires only a 16% increase in the C14 content at the sample location. If only one neutron were emitted from the body for every ten billion that were in the body, this would have been enough to increase the C14 content by the required 16% at the sample location.

chuds who leak about His grace, may they find His love one day too, Amen.

Christ VVON
Crusaders VVON
Orthodoxy VVON
Jews LQST
Muzzies LQST
Gaytheists LQST