The Shroud of Turin makes way more sense than water on Mars

_{Denyse O'Leary

August 8, 2011

Extraterrestrial life}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

In “Water on Mars: Materialism’s Shroud of Turin” (Evolution News & Views, August 5, 2011), David Klinghoffer muses on the “water on Mars” cult:

The news in today’s Science about water on Mars and with that the consequent possibility of Martian microbial life — how many times have we heard this before? — offers what might be the materialist’s Shroud of Turin.

Actually, there is a lot more to be said for the Shroud of Turin. The Shroud exists. If water on Mars were like the Shroud of Turin, we would know it existed, but wouldn’t know if life resulted.

The question of life on Mars requires extremely generous assumptions about the origin as well as the subsequent evolution of life. Materialists assume that if you’ve got some water, life will result. So if there is life on Mars, it would make all the difference.

Klinghoffer, an Orthodox Jew, notes,

Actually, there’s better scientific evidence that the Shroud of Turn is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ than that life exists or has existed on Mars. After all, there is at least debatable evidence for the former but not as yet one single iota for the latter.

Sort of what we were trying to say, but …. also …

If the Shroud were like water on Mars: A whole bunch of people would be devoting themselves to looking for a Shroud of Turin that they are sure must exist.

Comments

I have to agree with Scheesman. What does it ultimately matter if there is water or not? What is wrong in trying to obtain scientific knowledge on this topic? Why would that be a "cult"? I also don't understand the recent trend on UD to reference a science story and basically poo-pooh everything in such a dismissive manner. Is there any science that News actually thinks is worthwhile or does she want to sneer at everything? It also seems contradictory - on the one hand ID wants to be respected as a true scientific discipline for asking the kinds of questions that mainstream doesn't ask, but seems to have no patience with other forms of speculative science. Maybe these avenues of questioning are wrong, but sometimes in the research and in the asking of these questions much is learned.woodford_{August 8, 2011
August
08
Aug
8
08
2011
03:31 PM
3
03
31
PM
PDT}

I fail to understand why it should be an issue to the ID community if water is found on Mars. It hardly is the same thing as discovering life, and I will not begrudge those who desperately search for it beyond earth their tiny morsels of hope -- there have been precious few! It seems like an attitude of hyper-scepticism has entered this site recently. I think it would be cool if they found liquid water flowing on/under the martian surface. Is there another explanation for all the fluvial geological features?SCheesman_{August 8, 2011
August
08
Aug
8
08
2011
03:18 PM
3
03
18
PM
PDT}

I actually wrote a e-mail to David Klinghoffer protesting his article for even suggesting that the Shroud was in the same category as the search for water, and life, on Mars (He did not respond),, Anyone who has followed the Shroud 'controversy' over the years, knows that it is very clear that the Shroud certainly has a lot more going for it, as far as actual evidence is concerned, than water, or life, on Mars does. The Shroud is, without doubt, the most scientifically scrutinized ancient relic known to man. The enigma of the 3-Dimensional/photographic negative image of the Man on the Shroud has steadfastly resisted all attempts to elucidate its plausible formation by 'natural' means, especially with the refutation of the erroneous carbon dating, of 1989, by Los Alamos National Laboratory: The following is the main peer reviewed paper which has refuted the 1989 Carbon Dating: Why The Carbon 14 Samples Are Invalid, Raymond Rogers per: Thermochimica Acta (Volume 425 pages 189-194, Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of California) Excerpt: Preliminary estimates of the kinetics constants for the loss of vanillin from lignin indicate a much older age for the cloth than the radiocarbon analyses. The radiocarbon sampling area is uniquely coated with a yellow–brown plant gum containing dye lakes. Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin. The radiocarbon date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud. The fact that vanillin can not be detected in the lignin on shroud fibers, Dead Sea scrolls linen, and other very old linens indicates that the shroud is quite old. A determination of the kinetics of vanillin loss suggests that the shroud is between 1300- and 3000-years old. Even allowing for errors in the measurements and assumptions about storage conditions, the cloth is unlikely to be as young as 840 years. http://www.ntskeptics.org/issues/shroud/shroudold.htm Rogers passed away shortly after publishing this paper, but his work was ultimately verified by the Los Alamos National Laboratory: Carbon Dating Of The Turin Shroud Completely Overturned by Scientific Peer Review Rogers also asked John Brown, a materials forensic expert from Georgia Tech to confirm his finding using different methods. Brown did so. He also concluded that the shroud had been mended with newer material. Since then, a team of nine scientists at Los Alamos has also confirmed Rogers work, also with different methods and procedures. Much of this new information has been recently published in Chemistry Today. http://shroudofturin.wordpress.com/2009/02/19/the-custodians-of-time/ This following is the Los Alamos National Laboratory report and video which completely confirms the Rogers' paper: “Analytical Results on Thread Samples Taken from the Raes Sampling Area (Corner) of the Shroud Cloth” (Aug 2008) Excerpt: The age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case....... LANL’s work confirms the research published in Thermochimica Acta (Jan. 2005) by the late Raymond Rogers, a chemist who had studied actual C-14 samples and concluded the sample was not part of the original cloth possibly due to the area having been repaired. - Robert Villarreal - Los Alamos National Laboratory http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/ Shroud Of Turin Carbon Dating Overturned By Scientific Peer Review - Robert Villarreal - Press Release video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4041193 further notes: Turin Shroud Enters 3D Age - Pictures, Articles and Videos https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1gDY4CJkoFedewMG94gdUk1Z1jexestdy5fh87RwWAfg Turin Shroud 3-D Hologram - Face And Body - Dr. Petrus Soons - video http://www.metacafe.com/w/5889891/ A Quantum Hologram of Christ's Resurrection? by Chuck Missler Excerpt: “You can read the science of the Shroud, such as total lack of gravity, lack of entropy (without gravitational collapse), no time, no space—it conforms to no known law of physics.” The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. Dame Piczek created a one-fourth size sculpture of the man in the Shroud. When viewed from the side, it appears as if the man is suspended in mid air (see graphic, below), indicating that the image defies previously accepted science. The phenomenon of the image brings us to a true event horizon, a moment when all of the laws of physics change drastically. http://www.khouse.org/articles/2008/847 The Center Of The Universe Is Life - General Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Entropy and The Shroud Of Turin - video http://www.metacafe.com/w/5070355 "Miracles do not happen in contradiction to nature, but only in contradiction to that which is known to us of nature." St. Augustinebornagain77_{August 8, 2011
August
08
Aug
8
08
2011
02:34 PM
2
02
34
PM
PDT}

Prev 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply