Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 29:
Line 29: + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Shroud of Turin (view source)
Revision as of 05:44, December 28, 2015
, 05:44, December 28, 2015→Shroud of Turin
:The Shroud is a photographic negative, before photography was invented. The most plausible explanation is that the Shroud captures an image of the flash of light which necessarily accompanied the [[Resurrection]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:28, 27 December 2015 (EST)
:The Shroud is a photographic negative, before photography was invented. The most plausible explanation is that the Shroud captures an image of the flash of light which necessarily accompanied the [[Resurrection]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 22:28, 27 December 2015 (EST)
::I'm not a Muslism. I took the name Muhamad because Muhammad, Mohammed, Mohammad, and Satan were taken.
::Well, I posted a verse which explicitly denies that a single cloth was used to wrap Jesus' body. The shroud is a single cloth. Also, the weaving style is a Medieval European style of weaving. Many other garments, specifically underwear, were woven in this pattern/style in Europe at the time. The shroud only dates to the 12th century AD approximately. So that kind of supports the conclusion that the shroud is a hoax, or was intended to be a decoration.
::There is no actual blood on the shroud. A chemist named Walter McCrone and his team determined that the "bloodstains" were actually red ochre and paint. You can read his data if you'd like, just Google "Walter McCrone Shroud of Turin".
::Perhaps, "consensus" was a bad term to use. I meant conclusion. And what do you care of science anyway? You deny evolution and climate change on a daily basis. I hate to remind you of your past mistakes, but even when presented with data and evidence (Richard Lenski affair) you deny the facts presented before you. Anything that brings up your insecurity about death and not going to Heaven after the fact intimidates you. So, you will ignore the evidence, and forever live on in ignorance under the assumption that a Medieval piece of cloth has the face of a white man in it. Score one for the Christian Right.
::As far as being a photographic negative, there were primitive photographic techniques that existed at the time. In the 11th century, a man named Ibn al-Haytham (oh no, scary Moozlim name!) invented the technique using silver sulphate in a dark room. Leonardo da Vinci used this technique, only he called it "camera obscura". He was commissioned to make a replacement of a shroud-like artifact that was used as a decoration in churches. He used this technique. The shroud was eventually bought by a noble family in Europe in the 15th century. The shroud you are adoring and glorifying might be the exact one created by da Vinci, which I find even more fascinating, because it's realistic, and an actual relic of a mastermind (probably). [[User:Muhamad|Muhamad]] ([[User talk:Muhamad|talk]]) 00:44, 28 December 2015 (EST)
(username removed)