TRANSPONDER wrote: ↑Sun Jan 01, 2023 9:28 am
that does not equat postulating the supernatural miracles and faith -claims with scientific hypotheses.
Is a multiverse a "scientific" hypothesis?
Is inflationary theory a "scientific" hypothesis?
Is dark energy/dark matter a "scientific" hypothesis?
None of these have empirical evidence to show that any of these exist. It's even theoretically impossible to directly measure them. Just because a scientist proposes an explanation does not make them scientific.
There is evidence to make dark matter a hypothesis to explain an observed effect.
How do you directly measure dark matter? What is the evidence?
That cannot be equated withe a faithclaim such as a god (name you own) doing it with no hypothesis how. The two things - Theist faithclaim and scientific hypothesis are NOT equivalent, you are equivocating in pretending they are,
Please point to me where I've said a faith claim and a scientific hypothesis are equivalent.
All I've said is that we see modern science abandoning naturalistic explanations. So, it's not the non-naturalistic realm trying to conform to science. Rather, what we see is science conforming to the non-naturalistic realm.
I know how science works - it is not fiddling the evidence to fit the faithclaim.
We will get back to this, esp when we take a deep dive into C14 dating.
But as I said, the hand underneath the other does look too long anyway. I asked you what you thought. You didn't.
I already said "X-ray effect easily explains the fingers being too long." But another factor is image projection distortion. The image we see on the shroud is not actually a photographic-like image. Rather, it is a projection of a 3-D body onto a 2-D surface that was curved. The shroud was laying on the body, so there are curves in the shroud that follow the body. This image projection can distort features, like the fingers.
Like i say, it looks good, but the anatomy does mismatch when you look closer.
There are anomalies throughout the body. And it's because it's not a photo-like image. Which is interesting also in itself in that how would a forger know to depict a 3-D body correctly on a curved 2-D surface? When we reconstruct the true 3-D body image based on the 2-D image of the shroud that includes the curves of the shroud, it is only then do we get a realistic 3-D reconstruction of the body. I'll post more on this later.
I am sure you will find a lot of apologetics material dismissing McCrone. You may save yourself the work as I don't care.
Why don't you care? Or do you accept that McCrone's findings should automatically be dismissed?
The point that he dissents is minor, as is the point that the STURP team may have all been believers.
This is a common charge (as we see in sillybeliefs). Yet, I have found no site publishing what are the religious beliefs of all the STURP members. Until this is produced, this is pure speculation at best and defamation at worst.
The point is, it is one team's findings and the STURP team is One team, isn't it?) and the circumstances of the object require that findings be tested, checked and verified, as they are open to question - that, Mr. Know How Science works is how it is done.
I'll let slide that additional ad hoc comment as well.
So what if it is "one" team? What if it was two teams or three? What does the number of teams have to do with anything?
All of their findings and experimental results have been published. Their publications have been peer reviewed and are still under scrutiny to this day. Anybody can check their results. It's not to say their results are the final word, but there is nothing they are hiding from the scientific community.
I am open to finding that indeed it is a shroud of an actual crucified man.
This is the most logical inference from all the data so far.
But it does show, does it not, that the shroud can hardly have intended for a man they thought was dead, and of course John's Lazarus -bands are straight away in the bin. If it is (at the best) a sheet draped over the body, that suggests that is was temporary, and forget about 100 lb spices. We have already started to see the gospel account of the 'burial' crumble.
It was not simply just draped over, but it was also wrapped by the side strip. I posted this in post 1622
otseng wrote: ↑Mon Dec 26, 2022 12:02 am
It is most likely this side strip was wrapped around the body with the shroud to hold it all together.
Dr. John Jackson explains his theory in this BBC documentary:
That's giving the shroud the best. But you see why I'm talking of a contact print, either with a real body or an (admittedly remarkable) image.
Though that's unlikely, it's really the only alternative. But when you say "print", what are you referring to that caused the image? If not paint, then what else?
It is interesting and possibly better evidence for Jesus crucified than the NT could be, as it debunks the gospels and tells of a man taken out of the tomb after NOT having been buried as dead. I'm open to that one, as it was always what the gospels tell us, if we look deeper than the surface.
This possibility will be discussed later. But this scenario is several steps (miles?) down the path of investigation.