I said during the presentations on Gobleki Tepe/Durupinar site etc that we sould expect to be seeing more and more of these types of things (Noahs temple, Ark, An Advanced Lunisolar calendar etc coming to light and so here is another.
"A team of Italian researchers have entered the debate over the Shroud of Turin, the linen cloth believed by some to have been Jesus Christ's burial shroud."
(It is and for a few reasons)
"In a study published in the journal Heritage, the authors conducted dating work on a sample from the Shroud, coming to the conclusion that it may be a 2,000-year-old relic."
"The Shroud, which has long been the subject of intense scrutiny, features a faint image of man that some believe is the body of Jesus miraculously imprinted onto the cloth. While the latest study does not discuss the question of whether or not the artifact was indeed Jesus' burial shroud specifically, the authors did find that its age is roughly consistent with his time."
"The findings challenge previous research supporting a medieval origin of the Shroud, which is one of the most studied archaeological objects in the world."
(And again that's why you are not hearing much about it, if it was something that proved undoubtably that it couldn't have been? Or even just leaned in that direction? Then that information would have been plastered all over every media outlet, social media platform etc, But something that leads toward authenticity? Ends up buried in the haystack of modern day media overload/short attention spans. Just like I asked with the advanced lunisolar calendar, "The question you have to ask yourself is, "Why now?")
"While some studies have come to the conclusion that the artifact might be genuine, the scientific consensus leans toward the Shroud being a medieval artifact and a forgery."
(Exactly what else would you expect from them?
They can't explain UAP/Information in the DNA molecule but they know for certian this is a fake?
Whatever player, times getting short yo...)
"In the Heritage study, lead researcher Liberato De Caro, from the Institute of Crystallography in Italy, and colleagues employed a novel method for dating ancient linen threads by inspecting their structural degradations using a technique known as Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering."
(A technique not available in the late 80s when it was radiocarbon dated to the middle ages.)
"The authors said the results of their analysis were "fully compatible" with analogous measurements obtained from a linen sample whose dating, according to historical records, is A.D. 55-74, and consistent with the hypothesis that the Shroud is a 2,000-year-old relic.
"X-ray penetrates into matter and allows [us to] measure the order of the structures," De Caro told Newsweek. "With aging—periods of many centuries—cellulose shows a reduction of its natural order. With X-ray we can measure this order and associate an age to the investigated sample. The natural aging of the linen of the Turin Shroud is compatible with 2,000 years of history."
"Since the results do not agree with previous radiocarbon dating research, the authors said "a more accurate and systematic X-ray investigation of more samples taken from the Turin Shroud fabric would be mandatory to confirm the conclusions of our study."
Here is what gives it away as to its authenticity:
1) Fakes and forgeries are based on something.
This is the only one of its kind.
So where is/are the original(s)
that this would have been based on?
Nonexistant and for a reason.
They dont exist.
2) Numerous parties have tried to reproduce the image seen on the linen and all have met with limited if any success, so how was it created.
Something(s) the Newsweek article didn't point out? They found pollen that would have been present in the Middle east lodged between the fibers, and analysis of other linens from Europe during the 1300's didnt match up.
Draw your own conclusions.
"What I know
trumps what you think."
The door on this ark?
(Its wood right?
It offers shelter
from the storms of life right?)
The Age of grace?
Rapidly coming to a close.
No comments:
Post a Comment