According to the paper by Joseph Kohlbeck and Eugenia Nitowski published in Biblical Archaeology Review in 1986, “further analysis was conducted by Dr. Riccardo Levi-Setti of the Enrico Fermi Institute of the University of Chicago who put both shroud and Jerusalem samples through his high-resolution scanning ion microprobe and produced graphs; these graphs revealed that […]
Author: hughfarey
I’ve been criticised, over the years, for assiduously pointing out the mistakes (and occasional deceptions), of authenticist popularists, but rarely if ever reviewing the podcasts and videos of those who think the Shroud is medieval. There are several reasons for that. Firstly, those who pontificate about authenticity are nearly always either proclaimed, or self-proclaimed, experts. […]
About the middle of June 2022, a podcast called ‘The Gracious Guest,’ hosted by Mike Creavey, invited Joe Marino to come in and answer the question, “How Old is the Shroud???” (Yup, three question marks). A good half of the interview is devoted to persistent insinuation that the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud was a […]
Many years ago an enthusiastic sindonologist decided that he thought he could see teeth on the image on the Shroud of Turin. The earliest report I can find is from Shroud News, of September 1982, relaying an article in the Sidney Daily Telegraph, itself based on something which appeared in the USA a little earlier. […]
The Sudarium of Oviedo, Signs of Jesus Christ’s Death, by César Barta. A Selective Review. To demonstrate that the Sudarium of Oviedo is the companion to the Shroud of Turin, and that both are described in the Gospel of St John, several pieces of evidence might be adduced, and a new book by Cesar Barta […]
Frankly, I’m a little surprised that the news that the Shroud has at last been definitively proven to be from the time of Christ has received considerably less publicity than the discovery that it is actually a tablecloth made in Burton-on-Trent, or the idea that Jesus didn’t die from crucifixion, but by rupturing blood vessels […]
Popular commenters on the Shroud invariably mention the 1978 investigations carried out by the STuRP team, but usually forget that an earlier scientific investigation had already been carried out by an Italian Commission, with almost contradictory results. One reason for this is the difficulty of obtaining much detailed information regarding the earlier report, which seems […]
Prequel! Added much later than the original post, but this seems to be the place. I’m indebted to Gary Habermas’s recent book, On The Resurrection (Volume 1), for a mention of a possible fourth archaeological bit of evidence for the crucifixion in the Cambridge Encyclopaedia of Human Paleopathology. It talks about some bones recovered “from […]
I have a pair of gaudy cufflinks, with large cut “stones” set in “silver.” They are fashion jewellery, and cost practically nothing, but they often stimulate a curious question, especially from children: “Are they real?” What, I wonder, is the answer? I often reply, “No, they’re imaginary,” but that is, of course, not what was […]
A recent paper published in World Scientific News 1 observes that Shroud blood contains significantly less nitrogen than ordinary blood, and that a possible explanation for this is that neutron radiation created during the Resurrection of Christ converted the nitrogen into carbon-14, thereby coincidentally distorting the medieval date discovered in 1988. To find out whether […]