http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-10-06-shroud-turin_N.htm

Just another reason that organized religion fears science and finds it necessary to war against empirical thought. The famous shroud goes on display by the Vatican despite this revelation (no pun intended).

Tags: Shroud, Turin, debunked, of

Views: 6

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I maintain the glaring argument that few on either side even use:

You can't get a correctly-proportioned 2D image by wrapping it around a 3D object. If this were an actual shroud, once you unwrap it from the object the image would be wildly distorted. E.g.; the eyes on the image would measure as far apart as the person's eyes, plus the depth between eyes and tip of the nose.
What I don't get about the shroud is that, if it's for real, then that almost certainly means Jesus did NOT resurrect after 3 days in the tomb. The time it would take for the image to transfer to the cloth must certainly be considerable . . . way more than a mere 3 days!

Why would Christians WANT it to be real?
Actually, christians think the image transferred to the shroud via a miracle when his body was reanimated. They say it's the first photograph or some such nonsense. Which, naturally, is not true, but christians are adept at believing things that are not true.
Xian: "Our thing is real because this science backs it up!"

Us: "Actually, there are huge flaws in your science, for instance..."

Xian: "... Well ... it's God, so it's a miracle."

Us: "Great, then stop trying to use science to back it up when it clearly doesn't."

It's a formula I rather enjoy imposing on them: Get them to admit you have to do away with science and reason to believe in god. ;-)
God is beyond reason.

Beyond reason is insanity.

Belief in god is insane.
Actually it is the first photograph, but it was probably taken by De Vinchi.
The Shroud's known provenance predates da Vinci by about a century before his birth.
As I understand it, the material predates Da Vinci. He still could have used it.

Yeah, it's a long shot, and a hypothesis that might never be proven. But an intriguing one. Da Vinci definitely had the tools, the intelligence, the motivation, the talent, the cahones, the sense of humor and very likely a seething hatred for the church (though you couldn't exactly advertise it back then).

Anyone with the right tools, talent and guts could have done it. But if it was Da Vinci, it's exactly the kind of thing he would have done.
De-bunked long ago...they die and their inheritors take up the stupid arguments once again...nothing like a moron...repetitive eh?
You see the link in that article to "faith and reason"? lol!!! I love how such an adored item can all of a sudden be "irrelevant" once debunked! ROFLS!! Very amusing.

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service