[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [escepticos] RV: El Santo Sudario proviene de Jerusalén, dicen expertos
----- Mensaje original -----
De: Mario <cdelrioc en cantv.net>
Para: Escepticos <escepticos en dis.ulpgc.es>
Enviado: miércoles, 04 de agosto de 1999 2:45
Asunto: [escepticos] RV: El Santo Sudario proviene de Jerusalén, dicen expertos
> Curioso. Al mismo tiempo que se toca el tema de la Síndone aquí, tb. se
> toca en la lista Enigmas. Venga, ayudadme a enderezar almas descarriadas,
> quiero opiniones.
Pues esto es lo que opina el CSICOP:
De: <SkeptInq en aol.com>
Para: <CSICOP-ANNOUNCE en LISTSERV.AOL.COM>
Enviado: viernes, 06 de agosto de 1999 21:41
Asunto: Recent Shroud Claims Based on Discredited Data
> RECENT SHROUD CLAIMS BASED ON EARLIER, SCIENTIFICALLY DISCREDITED DATA
> AMHERST, N.Y.--New claims that pollen grains on the Shroud of Turin link it
> to pre-eighth-century Jerusalem were made August 2 by researchers at the
> International Botanical Congress in St. Louis. In fact, however, the claims
> are based on earlier, scientifically discredited data. Here is a brief
> review of some of the claims that were reported uncritically by the
> Associated Press and other media sources.
> POLLENS: It was reported that pollens on the shroud proved it came from
> Palestine, but the source for the pollens was a freelance criminologist, Max
> Frei, who once pronounced the forged "Hilter Diaries" genuine. Frei's
> tape-lifted samples from the Shroud were controversial from the outset since
> similar samples taken by the Shroud of Turin Research Project in 1978 had
> comparatively few pollens. As it turned out, after Frei's tapes were
> examined following his death in 1983, they also had very few pollens--except
> for a particular one that bore a suspicious cluster on the "lead" (or end),
> rather than on the portion that had been applied to the shroud. (See
> Skeptical Inquirer magazine, Summer 1994 pp. 379-385.)
> FLORAL IMAGES. Accompanying the unscientific pollen evidence were claims
> that faint plant images have been "tentatively" identified on the shroud.
> These follow previous "discoveries" of "Roman coins" over the eyes and even
> Latin and Greek words, such as "Jesus" and "Nazareth," that some researchers
> see-Rorschach-like-in the shroud's mottled stains. The floral images were
> reported by a psychiatrist who has taken up image analysis and made other
> discredited claims about the shroud image.
> BLOOD. The Associated Press reported claims that the shroud bears type AB
> blood stains. Perhaps this erroneous information has its origin in other
> fake shrouds of Jesus, since the Shroud of Turin's stains are not only
> suspiciously red (unlike genuine blood that blackens with age) but they
> failed batteries of tests by internationally known forensic experts. The
> "blood" has been definitively proved to be composed of red ocher and
> vermilion tempera paint.
> OVIEDO CLOTH. Uncritical reportage suggested the Shroud of Turin gained
> credibility by being linked to another notorious cloth, the Sudarium of
> Oviedo, which some believe was the "napkin" that covered Jesus' face.
> Unfortunately like other "relics" of Jesus-some 40 shrouds, vials of his
> blood and tears, and other products of medieval relic-mongering-the Oviedo
> cloth is of questionable provenance. It has no historical record prior to
> the eighth century and, in contrast to the shroud, lacks a facial image. The
> supposed matching of bloodstains on the Turin and Oviedo cloths is but
> another exercise in wishful thinking. As to the alleged matchup of pollens,
> once again the evidence comes from the questionable tapes of Max Frei.
> DATING. The assertion that blood and pollen matching prove the Shroud of
> Turin dates to at least the eighth century is--based on the evidence--absurd.
> The shroud cloth was radiocarbon dated to circa 1260-1390 by three separate
> laboratories. The date is consistent with a fourteenth-century bishop's
> report to Pope Clement VII that an earlier bishop had discovered the forger
> and that he had confessed.
> CONCLUSION. As in the past, claims that the Turin cloth may be authentic
> are simply based on "shroud science"--an approach that begins with the
> desired answer. In contrast, genuine science demonstrates emphatically that
> the shroud image is the work of a medieval artist and that the cloth never
> held a body--let alone that of Jesus.
> Summary critique prepared by Joe Nickell, Senior Research Fellow with the
> Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal
> (CSICOP) and author of _Inquest on the Shroud of Turin_.
> To interview Nickell, contact 716-636-1425 X310.
> For AP coverage of the study go to
> For NY Times coverage go to
jamc en ctv.es
Sinaptic en el IRC
"Tal vez no estemos aquí para alabar a dios, sino para crearlo"
A. C. Clarke