Shroud of Turin

[auntiegrav]

To convert non-believers. Agnostics too.

The bottle cap could be proven if you have the $$$.

Or if you have several generations of children raised from first speech to think that the bottle cap is from Heysoos Christos.
Pretty easily done if you are the Church of Churches. By that, I mean McDonalds. Put it in a Happy Meal when they are young, and they will be addicted for life.
Religion is ALL in the marketing. Thousands of years of refined marketing science; stained glass, the tallest buildings, the most gold, the best voices, and The Book.
Add it all up with early indoctrination rituals and you have the makings of an Embedded Product and Captive Customers.

The best story I've found about the Shroud of Turin is in Rand Flem-Ath's "The Atlantis Blueprint", where the shroud is the wrap from when DeMolay (founder of the Masons) was tortured by the Inquisition. The shroud turned up in the hands of one of his relatives, which fits with standard funerary practices.

As for the military keeping a community quiet, well, they don't have to. They only have to keep the story in a state of disbelief and paranormal. As long as evidence is scarcer than the spookiness of the story, then the story is not 'true'. Most people don't take a stand on belief, they just say what they think it is ok to say when they are asked. If you ask 100 people at a UFO convention if they believe in UFO's, you'll get a pretty high percentage that believe in UFO's. If you take the same 100 people 2 weeks later, and ask them at their place of business (in front of their bosses or customers) if they believe in UFO's, you will get entirely different results.

Ask people in church if they believe in God, and they will say "yes, of course".
Ask the same people on a public school job application, and you will find an awful lot have become 'agnostic'.

 

[Rick Deckard]

No, we don't. Unless you suffer from brain damage you use 100% of your brain.

S'funny, I was thinking about that "10%" figure the other day and it just doesn't make sense to me - I mean, why would we evolve a brain and only use 10% of it?

In the end, I decided that whoever is quoting "10%" probably meant that we only understand 10% of the brain functionality...something that does make a lot more sense to me.

 

[pixelsmith]

i think it should be stated that we use only 10 percent of our common sense.

 

[EvilSkeptic]

The shroud of turin was obviously a fake, there is no proof that jesus existed at all. He is only written about in the bible, which came in to existence way before he was said to have lived and accounts of his death and life are a total mishmash of different and contradictory stories. You think some one else during that time would have noticed this great miracle worker.. but no one did. So debating over the authenticity of a dirty hanky that supposedly records the visage of a guy who never existed is just silly.

 

[derekcbart]

Hi DVS.

I just thought that you would be interested in knowing that Joe Nickell just released a new book called "Relics Of The Christ" that seems to address some of the Shroud points you brought up. I haven't purchased this book yet, but I have heard a couple of interviews with him recently and in the interviews he discusses your points, so I expect a more detailed analysis in the book itself.

Here is the Amazon link:

 

[Shugi]

The first carbon-dating tests were carried out by *3* independent labs and all 3 dated the cloth to about the 13th Century. At which point the shroud keepers say "oops, we gave you a piece of cloth that was used to restore the shroud, that's why the date is wrong". So, when a 'genuine' piece is requested for testing, the keepers say "no more testing, we don't want to damage the cloth any further".

I find that VERY suspicious - it seems to me that the only 'damage' done so far are the tests that clearly show that the cloth is indeed from the 13th century and the best that the keepers can do now is claim the results 'inconclusive'. In other words, a publics relations exercise in damage limitation.

Its also quite interesting that one of the scientists, Raymond Rogers, appearently made shortly before his death a video in which he states that after further analyis he has done he now believes that it could be genuine.

Dr Rogers said: 'I don't believe in miracles that defy the laws of nature. After the 1988 investigation I'd given up on the shroud.

'But now I am coming to the conclusion that it has a very good chance of being the piece of cloth that was used to bury the historic Jesus.'

Is the Turin Shroud genuine after all? From beyond the grave, a startling new claim | Mail Online

 

[Aaron LeClair]

Wow, quoted Rick D eh? He just lurks now if that. Not sure if he'll respond, so don't hold it against him. He left long ago.

 

[Frozen E.T. Burrito]

Its also quite interesting that one of the scientists, Raymond Rogers, appearently made shortly before his death a video in which he states that after further analyis he has done he now believes that it could be genuine.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...d-genuine-From-grave-startling-new-claim.html

I heard a couple of interviews with *another* of the original 70s scientists that worked on it, Barry Schwartz, and he too seems convinced that it's legit (also, says he's a Jew and not Christian).

I recall, from a year or so ago, that his reporting is that the blood is indeed real, and from the placements on the "body" and patterns, many of the wounds were from a particular kind of lash used by Romans of the time... seems it had three or so leather strips coming out of it, each with a bone bead of some sort on the end. He said that he had no idea if it was Jesus or not, but that it was definitely *someone* who was beat severely.

I suppose one could google up some Barry Schwartz interviews if they are interested... I heard them on the Kevin Smith show.

 

[pixelsmith]

i believe it is fake.

the face on the cloth looks similar to a photograph in that there is no distortion. if the shroud was draped over a face, then the image was produced somehow, then the shroud removed and laid flat, then the image of the face would be distorted from wrapping around the face. you would have a very wide facial image. i hope this makes sense.

 

[Astroboy]

Yeah, the "We only use 10% of our brain" is one of the most commonly perpetuated myths.

The other one that is more irritating because it actually makes people spent stupid money is the "Drink 8 glass of water a day or you'll be dehydrated" myth. It's not based on any scientific study. Yet, it is common advice given to people even by nutritionists. Having lived in hot humid climates I assure you even people in those areas do not drink 8 glasses of water a day and you don't see people dropping like flies. But bottled water companies are not going to tell you this if they can make you buy water that is no better than what comes out of your tap.

snopes.com: Eight Glasses of Water Per Day?

Now, back to the silly shroud.

 

[Jaxx Noamon]

This supposed Shroud of Turin is a total fake. Nuff said, move along, nothing more to see here. These are not the Gods you are looking for... Move along.