Interesting and Humour - page 3811
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Wonderful post above: a demonstration of the functioning of the rule of law reduced to idiocy.
But that idiocy is at least hilarious.
...
New microscope shatters Turin shroud falsification hypothesis
A new microscope, which appeared at the Institute of Crystallography in Bari has allowed scientists to find on the Shroud of Turin blood particles that had an increased content of creatinine and ferritin. The find at least shatters the results of the last study, which stated that the shroud is not the shroud of Jesus Christ and was made in the Middle Ages.
University of Padua professor Giulio Fanti explained that the particles found show that the blood of the man the body was wrapped in suffered greatly. Creatinine and ferrotin are released when a person is severely injured - when they are tortured. So scientists have confirmed a violent death, whereas previously it had been thought that blood traces, as well as the face, were an elaborate fabrication.
The results of the new study are published in the scientific journal PlosOne in an article entitled "New biological evidence from studies of the atomic analysis of the Shroud of Turin".
The shroud is now in the Cathedral of St John the Baptist in Turin. And while scientists refute each other, the queue to the shroud continues unabated. The last time the Pope visited the shroud was in 2015.
The new microscope has destroyed the hypothesis of falsification of the Shroud of Turin
Bullshit - nobody destroyed anything.
The canvas was woven in the Middle Ages. Radiocarbon analysis and its conclusions are obvious.
And what blood has dripped on the canvas over the centuries is whatever and whoever you want.
Bullshit - nobody destroyed anything.
The canvas was woven in the Middle Ages. Radiocarbon analysis and its conclusions are obvious.
And what blood has dripped on the canvas over the centuries - whatever and whoever you want.
Believers don't want to understand it ))))))
The main thing is to pull out a part and justify the whole on it. Typical trick.
There is a vast literature on the falsity/truthfulness of the shroud. Each side has its own argumentation.
Radiocarbon analysis works fairly accurately if the specimen has been stored in roughly the same environment during its existence. The shroud has been in a fire.
The radiocarbon date argument is challenged by the fire, after which it was boiled in sunflower oil in an attempt to clean the soot.
But that's not the point.
Any artifact (in our case, the shroud) becomes a historical fact only if the information obtained by different methods is consistent. And in the case of the shroud is a complete divergence of FOR and AGAINST
When dating artifacts NEVER rely only on one method and radiocarbon is one of many.
One of the arguments in favour of fakery was the conclusion that the image was painted. And the above information refutes this argument.
There are arguments for dating based on fabric technology - fabric from the time of Christ, which contradicts the results of radiocarbon method, and given the sunflower oil, it can be disregarded altogether. There are studies to this effect that if we accept not 8% fresh organics as was the case with radiocarbon analysis but 100% (and it was boiled down at all), then the date according to this method is just shifted to the time of Christ's death.
Here is what theItalianNational Agency for New Technology, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development(Enea) concluded two years ago:
"The double image, front and back, of a man subjected to torture and crucifixion, which can be seen on the linen cloth of the Shroud of Turin," reports the report, "has many unusual characteristics, chemical and physical, which at present cannot be reproduced in laboratory conditions, cannot be replicated, and therefore also falsify images on the shroud. But this also makes it impossible to formulate a reliable hypothesis about the mechanism of formation of the print. Today, science is not able to explain how the Shroud was formed by a print of the body. It has only been established that the body was on the cloth as if not more than two days.
But the origin of the imprint on the Shroud - this is the main mystery. And it remains unsolved.
...
The main thing is to pull out a part and justify the whole on it. A typical trick.
1. On the subject of the reptiloids who came from the planet Nibiru, who built the Great Wall of China and defeated the Russians who came from Hyperborea, there is also "extensive literature".
2. No fires and no boiling in oil, vinegar, milk, urine affect the radiocarbon analysis data.
3. The quality of radiocarbon analysis does not depend on the consistency of storage conditions. 4.
4. historical facts and historical artefacts are not influenced by sick madmen who suddenly decide they disagree with something. The brightest example Sphinx - the sculpture has stood for 35 centuries and was for all a historical fact, but suddenly there was a sick person from the USA who declared usual signs of weathering on soft layers of a rock from sandstone "water erosion" and started to run - 10 000 years, 20 000 years, 50 000 years.... The fact that sick is not a geologist and what is obvious to all geologists nobody cares about - "extensive literature", "lack of consistency" etc...
5. The shroud (canvas) was woven in the Middle Ages.
By the way, the Vatican has never officially recognised the Shroud as authentic.
1. On the subject of the reptiloids who came from the planet Nibiru, who built the Great Wall of China and who defeated the Russians who came from Hyperborea, there is also "extensive literature". the existence and vastness of literature in itself means nothing and is not worth anything.
2. No fires and no boiling in oil, vinegar, milk, urine affect the radiocarbon analysis data.
3. The quality of radiocarbon analysis does not depend on the consistency of storage conditions. 4.
4. historical facts and historical artefacts are not influenced by sick madmen who suddenly decide they disagree with something. The brightest example Sphinx - the sculpture has stood for 35 centuries and was for all a historical fact, but suddenly there was a sick person from the USA who declared usual signs of weathering on soft layers of a rock from sandstone as "water erosion" and they started - 10 000 years, 20 000 years, 50 000 years.... The fact that sick is not a geologist and what is obvious to all geologists no one cares about - "extensive literature", "lack of consistency" etc...
5. The shroud (canvas) was woven in the Middle Ages.
By the way, the Vatican has never officially recognised the shroud as authentic.
Seems like a reasonable person (statistically), and here is just NOTHING.
Seems like a reasonable person (statistically), and here is just NOTHING.
The shroud was woven in the Middle Ages.
Everything else is "extensive literature".
...
2. No fires and no cooking in oil, vinegar, milk, urine affect radiocarbon data.
...So as the lack of calibration material.