Shroud of turin carbon 14 dating Keralasex chat

The image of the man on the Shroud can be read by 3D imaging technology. In addition, medieval paintings show the nails in the palm of Christ’s hands, the Shroud shows the nail wounds in his wrists which is anatomically correct.The flesh of the palms would not have supported the weight of the man’s body. Pollen from the Shroud is not only from the Jerusalem area, but from Turkey and the other places the Shroud is supposed to have resided.Not only can scientists and historians not reproduce the image using medieval technologies, they can’t reproduce it with modern technology.Italian scientist Paolo Di Lazzaro tried for five years to replicate the image and concluded that it was produced by ultraviolet light, but the ultraviolet light necessary to reproduce the image “exceeds the maximum power released by all ultraviolet light sources available today.” The time for such a burst “would be shorter than one forty-billionth of a second, and the intensity of the ultra violet light would have to be around several billion watts.” 2) The 3D capabilities of the image. The wounds of the crucified man are all consistent not only with Roman crucifixion, but the details of Jesus’ particular crucifixion – the scourging, the crown of thorns, no broken bones, and the wound in the side.The most recent critique argues that the samples used for the 1987 test were taken from an edge of the Shroud that was not simply patched in the middle ages, but patched with a difficult-to-detect interweaving.

One scientist proposes a new idea of how the mysterious Shroud could have been produced only to have another researcher argue that it was impossible.

When he developed the negative he noticed that it showed a positive image of a human face.

He concluded that the image itself was therefore, in effect, a photographic negative.

The most recent finding again suggests that the crucified man was tortured. The cloth is consistent with fabrics from first-century Israel, but not with medieval Europe.

A forger would have had to not only forge the image, but would have had to have detailed knowledge of linen weaves of the first century and then not only reproduce it, but age it convincingly.

Leave a Reply