Dan McClellan is a Scholar of the Bible. He does not have the scientific knowledge to determine whether the Shroud of Turin is authentic or not! This is a SUMMARY of the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) conclusions made by the numerous SCIENTISTS who conducted the study of the Shroud in 1978. "No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography. The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately. Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery. We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."
When it's a matter of dogma, people will happily accept any "proof" that supports their dogmatism and will willingly skip any evidence that "proof" is a fraud. Because of dogmatism.
Dan McClellan is a Scholar of the Bible. He does not have the scientific knowledge to determine whether the Shroud of Turin is authentic or not! This is a SUMMARY of the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) conclusions made by the numerous SCIENTISTS who conducted the study of the Shroud in 1978. "No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography. The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately. Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery. We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."
They did use artifacts of known age to generate a calibration curve (I think 9 total, which definitely isn't enough especially for a S curve fit). I don't personally know how many more samples are available to use as a validation set.
The Bishop of Troyes specifically says it’s a forgery, right around the time of its first appearance in history and in line with the carbon dating results. Crazies: Obviously this is ancient.
That 2022 article is a great example of begging the question. It assumes their conclusion is true as part of their argument. They want to prove their dating method works, so they analyze the Shroud of Turin with it. But there’s no way to verify if the analysis they get back is accurate, since we don’t know for certain if the Shroud existed prior to 1300. So the only way to say the dating method works is if you first presume the Shroud is authentic. The dating method is used to prove the Shroud is real, but also, the Shroud is used to prove the dating method works.
The whole "the image was burned on to the shroud" rhetoric is ridiculous, it's just really old painted cloth. The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia makes a good point about the current state of the shroud vs the state it was in when it was still new. "Lastly, the difficulty must be noticed that while the witnesses of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries speak of the image as being then so vivid that the blood seemed freshly shed, it is now darkened and hardly recognizable without minute attention. On the supposition that this is an authentic relic dating from the year A.D. 30, why should it have retained its brilliance through countless journeys and changes of climate for fifteen centuries, and then in four centuries more have become almost invisible? On the other hand if it be a fabrication of the fifteenth century this is exactly what we should expect."
So the theory is that a man was crucified and wrapped in an incredibly rare and expensive piece of linen, which would have been incredibly unusual since people who were crucified at the time were left on the crosses as a warning to others to obey the authorities. Or the bodies were disposed of in a mass grave. But the body was carefully wrapped in this linen and after being dead for a couple days this man came back to life and unwrapped himself and left the guarded tomb (again there is no logic to a crucified man being put in an expensive tomb and then for it to be guarded). And then someone had the warewithal to go collect this piece of linen and properly store it and care for it for over 1,300 years and wisely move it to a Christian church in northern France. Seems completely reasonable.
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but, according to the Bible, Joseph of Arimathea had Jesus taken down, properly dressed, and entombed, requests which were honored due to Joseph’s status and the Romans not wanting to push the tense relations with the Jews any farther. So that chunk, at least, has already been addressed as far as the logic goes. That said, the Shroud is absolutely BS, on every level.
He was awesome when he was young and made some great movies, but unfortunately, his person isn't good. I loved the very first Mad Max movie. It's a classic
It ses to me that of you want to argue that a new dating method is superior to existing methods, you should test it on objects of known age, not of objects who's age is contentious.
One objection that I never see made, and that I think should be made, is that the image does not match the image one would expect to find created by a body wrapped in a shroud (which would have encircled the body) or even draped across the body (which would have distorted the face). The image is that of a rigid photographic plate suspended above, and below the body.
The propaganda is effective only when you stifle critical thought. This isn't philosophy this is a science claim, if there is a method delivery to even character the totals necessary from different tests/procedures, then it's plausible it is natural( it makes sense on both sides of the argument - there is only natural no matter how you wish to extend science further- and miracles must be traceable otherwise science( an on going, and never complete studying of nature) will be silent to the how and especially specifically when or who.
The fact that the Shroud of Turin is, well, a shroud is a major piece of evidence against it being authentic. Jewish burial practices at the time did not make use of a single piece of cloth. Rather it was strips of cloth being wrapped around the body. In fact the Gospel of John (19:40) specifically describes Jesus's body being wrapped in strips of cloth.
I know someone who lost their job over the "Virgin Mary" water stain in Tampa/Clearwater FL back in 1996. She went there to camp out and worship bc she believed it was a "miracle". She was fired for calling in sick for a week & then getting spotted on the news by her boss. 😅 People still go there to pray 30 years later. They argue that bc it "appeared" just before Christmas & it looks a lot like the way people who have never seen Mary painted her in the 15th century, it has to be a manifestation from God! If you've never seen it you should Google it. My point is once they latch on to a "miracle" that "proves" what they believe, you can't explain to them how water splatter patterns are unique & that pattern is in line with every other water pattern & no magic had to be involved to create it - none of that matters. The shroud is more complicated than the water stain but watching Mel reminded me so much of that lady trying to explain why she believed the water stain was a miracle.
Well, at one point in the 90's, he WAS very vocal in telling anyone and everyone that he was "the King of all media!" Maybe he WAS the inspiration for the shroud! See, the lizardmen who mated with human females (and still do!) probably spawned Howard Stern, putting their faith in him as the savior of the world but then, somehow, the lizardmen took a mold of Howard's face and got in their time machine and...🤣😂👽🤖🤡💯
The hairstyle of a Jewish man from the first century... and the hairstyle of a couple hundred thousand men and women at Woodstock in 1969. And the hairstyle of a few billion other people before, between and since.
Doesn’t the Bible itself refute the shroud of Turin? I distinctly remember reading that Jesus was wrapped in strips of linen…strips being plural? Not one big body length single strip?
The curse of fire strikes again! 😅 Iirc the shroud survived fire two or three times in its recorded history. I have always taken it as a sign that god wanted to get rid of it.
The SoT is an excellent candidate for carbon 14 dating. C14 dating says it is Medieval. There is no rational reason to dispute this, unless you think "lying to get money" is a rational reason.
They are desperate for any kind if physical evidence to support their beliefs, If your faith is in only what you can see and touch, you have no faith at all! "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Hebrews 11:1)
I don't understand some Christians' need for science to prove them right. Like they don't understand the "I willingly choose to believe this highly improbable series of stories in the hope it works out really well for me after I die, even though it could well be a load of nonsense" part of faith.
That's not a part of faith. The word 'faith' has been much abused by modern English. It doesn't mean 'believing without evidence'; it means 'trusting the promises'. Completely different thing.
Interesting fact about the hair mark: there is absolutely no way that a human body wrapped in a shroud and left in a laying position would have left that sort of imprint. The hair should have been floating. According to Luigi Garlaschelli, who made an accurate replica of the shroud, the face was made by placing a bas-relief under the fabric and painting over it. This explains a strange mark in the neck region that doesn't match any anatomical structure. The rest of the body was painted in the same way, over the body of some guy.
Any artist that works in 3D on computers with 2D textures formed to the 3D surface, knows that the shroud is fake. What you described as the method of creating the shroud is correct.
my hypothesis is that they used a form of rust "dyeing" you have iron items wrapped in vinegar soaked material make sure the material is firmly attached to the metal and keep moist with vinegar for about a week. its a sort of burn, a chemical reaction between the rust and the mild acid.
Joe Rogan just mimics the Tucker Carlson "Hey I'm just asking questions..." schtick, but tries to conjure an air of credibility for it by performing it, unlike Tucker does, with a mellow delivery.
@@MegaBearsFan Did you know that, according to Christian Mythology, Santa raised just as many people from the dead as Jesus. But while Jesus raised whole people, Santa raised three children that were chopped up and brined to be sold as pork in a famine. Truly a superior miracle worker.
Interesting history: A 3-D rendition of the shroud is on display in the Catholic Chapel at the US Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs CO. This is because one of the professors was obsessed with the shroud and commissioned a young artist, who happened to be a member of my church in Denver, to create a cardboard model of the 3-D image which was then encased with fiber glass and put on display in the chapel. This was 1979 I believe.
@aahhhhhhhhhhhhh - Yeah, it's pretty consistent with the religious art of the medieval period in terms of depictions of the human form and the wounds. I meant more about how the fibers are individually colored or dyed and then woven, and not clumped together as if they were slathered with paint.
Thank you Dan as usual . "Game Set & Match". As one Born, Baptised, and Confirmed into the "Roman Catholic" Church. When It existed , pre Vatican II. I was taught that the "Shroud of Turin" Was not an article of faith and that it was most probably a medieval artistic object. You could believe it was genuine if you wanted to but that was a personal choice. I have always rejected any claims of" proof" for anything to do with biblical or the Jesus narrative. I regard the peddlers of such claims as Quacks and Charlatans Agents of deception.
Idk why people are obsessed about the shroud. It's not in any way verifiable evidence of the biblical claims, and it's definitely not a 2000-year fabric 🤦🏾♂️.
His name was Pierre d'Arcis. He sent a letter to Pope Clement VII in the late 1300s that said that an artist had confessed to him to painting the shroud. I don't know the artist's name or if he had done it nefariously or if he created it for someone who chose to use it as a forgery.
Quick check on wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin) opens saying it was Bishop Pierre d'Arcis in 1390 AD. I think that's who Dan was referring to.
This is why scholars like Dan need to be checked: he says @ 5:16 , " he can reproduce all the features of the shroud..." If you actually look at Garlachelli's mock-up, it lacks the resolution of the shroud in the nose area, very close but not quite!
Yea that's why no one came up with that scenario until the dude who did just that put out the video on it last year. The shroud is fake but don't premise yourself as some kind of intellect that knew before that video came out.
Exactly. I'm not an artist, but it's always seemed obvious to me that a shroud wrapped over a 3D face would not produce an image like a regular photograph. The face on the shroud should be stretched and warped and have folds in the cloth where it wasn't touching any skin.
@@johnphantom Cool story- no one came up with that explanation until last year when the dude put that video out showing exactly what you claim. So basically you held out your great wisdom on the world for 30 years? I seriously doubt that.
This is not just 1 year old. Specifically, I remember in 1996 when I saw the textures for the 3D models of Quake, I knew then the shroud was fake. You can find these textures from 1996 for yourself.
It's a 2D image. A 3D person would have shroud wrapping around face and body and thighs. Like skins for a video game, look at a face before it is applied to the mess.
I've never heard a good explanation for the face looking like a photograph. To cover all of the terrain of a face, and show the creases of the lips, eye sockets, and corners of the nose, you'd need to push a flat cloth into those recesses. And then when that cloth is laid flat it is not going to look like the face in the Shroud of Turin, or any kind of recognizable human face. The features should be stretched and distorted the same way continents are on a Mercator projection map. Usually when I bring this up, proponents of the Shroud say that Jesus radiated some kind of magical energy as he left his body. Which, of course, has no actual supporting evidence.
The real issue is not about the shroud of Turin. The real issue is JRE having 10's of millions listening to his show and believing him and his guests. My own grandmother used to buy the Enquirer each week while at the grocery. When I asked why she would buy such a rag of lies, she'd respond "they couldn't print it if it wasn't true".
Could you talk about the Mandylion/Image of Edessa and the Keramion in relation to the shroud of Turin? Is there any truth to people making connections between them? Or even that the Mandylion is the Shroud
Wow, this makes me reconsider my position. I was under the impression that features of the shroud remain inexplicable, and that the anatomy and hematology were all but perfect. I remember watching a documentary on the original investigation, how one scientist on the team (Raymond Rogers) changed his mind from a medieval dating when presented with new data and theory about a medieval fire, and a repair section sewn onto the shroud. How do you explain the image consisting on only the surface layer of the cloth? And why are they trying to recreate it with UV laser technology if it's obviously a medieval forgery?
there are also problems with the head being out of proportion to the body, which suggests an artist made the image of the head separately. Congrats on being open to changing your mind by the way!
I'm fairly familiar with WAXS , the technique mentioned. There are no publications using it for dating. Those guys introduce the technique and a bunch of assumptions and test a single fabric, the shroud. It smells BS, until someone tests a bunch of ancient fabrics.
Exactly. I like to point this out as the most obvious proof that it's fake. Unfortunately, people will just ignore this and change the subject when it's pointed out in a debate.
while I agree the Shroud is clearly medieval artwork I think this is a poor objection. The preferred hypothesis among Shroudies is that Jesus' image was made like a photograph on each side of the cloth (using neutron radiation hocus pocus) which, while a bad explanation overall, does explain this aspect of the appearance. They do not think it's a giant sweat stain.
When the zealot challenges the rational, it is "righteous", but when the rational challenges the zealot it is "blasphemy".
Dan McClellan is a Scholar of the Bible. He does not have the scientific knowledge to determine whether the Shroud of Turin is authentic or not!
This is a SUMMARY of the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) conclusions made by the numerous SCIENTISTS who conducted the study of the Shroud in 1978.
"No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.
The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.
Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery.
We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."
Thank you.
Pithy. Can I steal that?
Damn, I can't believe Mel Gibson and Joe Rogan were wrong about something. This has shaken me to my core.
I don't know how I'll find the will to go on.😉
Lol
I can hear Danny Glovers line from Lethal Weapon. "Mel, we're getting too old for this s***."
And then you ca hear Mel saying “bblublublublupluplublble… poink. I’m crazy, man. I made the shroud for Jesus.”🫣
@Evolution.1859 lol!
When it's a matter of dogma, people will happily accept any "proof" that supports their dogmatism and will willingly skip any evidence that "proof" is a fraud. Because of dogmatism.
Dan McClellan is a Scholar of the Bible. He does not have the scientific knowledge to determine whether the Shroud of Turin is authentic or not!
This is a SUMMARY of the STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) conclusions made by the numerous SCIENTISTS who conducted the study of the Shroud in 1978.
"No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image. Ultra Violet and infrared evaluation confirm these studies. Computer image enhancement and analysis by a device known as a VP-8 image analyzer show that the image has unique, three-dimensional information encoded in it. Microchemical evaluation has indicated no evidence of any spices, oils, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a direct contact of the Shroud with a body, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood. However, while this type of contact might explain some of the features of the torso, it is totally incapable of explaining the image of the face with the high resolution that has been amply demonstrated by photography.
The basic problem from a scientific point of view is that some explanations which might be tenable from a chemical point of view, are precluded by physics. Contrariwise, certain physical explanations which may be attractive are completely precluded by the chemistry. For an adequate explanation for the image of the Shroud, one must have an explanation which is scientifically sound, from a physical, chemical, biological and medical viewpoint. At the present, this type of solution does not appear to be obtainable by the best efforts of the members of the Shroud Team. Furthermore, experiments in physics and chemistry with old linen have failed to reproduce adequately the phenomenon presented by the Shroud of Turin. The scientific consensus is that the image was produced by something which resulted in oxidation, dehydration and conjugation of the polysaccharide structure of the microfibrils of the linen itself. Such changes can be duplicated in the laboratory by certain chemical and physical processes. A similar type of change in linen can be obtained by sulfuric acid or heat. However, there are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the totality of the image, nor can any combination of physical, chemical, biological or medical circumstances explain the image adequately.
Thus, the answer to the question of how the image was produced or what produced the image remains, now, as it has in the past, a mystery.
We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing mystery and until further chemical studies are made, perhaps by this group of scientists, or perhaps by some scientists in the future, the problem remains unsolved."
I find it hilarious that Jesus was allegedly 6 feet tall.
Did he also like long walks on the beach too, Mel? 😂
Yeah! Because of the drippy poem "Footprints." 😂😂😅
@ Now there is some fan fiction I don’t want to think about. 🤣
"No, we didn't say that Jesus was God, we said that Jesus was Godzilla," - All of the First Century Middle Eastern peasants who were his Disciples.
@@AA-mm6wu Of course he liked long walks on the beach! That’s where he picked up James and Simon!
Because why on Earth would they test their controversial new dating technique on, say, an object of indisputably known age?
They did use artifacts of known age to generate a calibration curve (I think 9 total, which definitely isn't enough especially for a S curve fit). I don't personally know how many more samples are available to use as a validation set.
The Bishop of Troyes specifically says it’s a forgery, right around the time of its first appearance in history and in line with the carbon dating results.
Crazies: Obviously this is ancient.
That 2022 article is a great example of begging the question. It assumes their conclusion is true as part of their argument.
They want to prove their dating method works, so they analyze the Shroud of Turin with it. But there’s no way to verify if the analysis they get back is accurate, since we don’t know for certain if the Shroud existed prior to 1300. So the only way to say the dating method works is if you first presume the Shroud is authentic. The dating method is used to prove the Shroud is real, but also, the Shroud is used to prove the dating method works.
That is how you date fossils, every YEC knows that.
@@meej33 We aren't talking about dating fossils though.
Both Joe and Mel have credibility issues which render their discussion of the Shroud of Turin’s authenticity irrelevant and frankly, laughable.
9:00 "I don't know if it's real or not"
Finally Mel speaks the truth.
Brilliant as always Dan, thanks.
Who TF would take anything Mel Gibson says seriously?
Joe
Make religeous delusion great again.
Mel Gibson
Yeah, why is he suddenly an expert here? Promoting a new Jesus movie?
Have you not seen Leathal Weapon 4? I mean, that film alone gives Gibson the credibility to state that the Shroud of Turin is authentic. Duh.
The whole "the image was burned on to the shroud" rhetoric is ridiculous, it's just really old painted cloth.
The 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia makes a good point about the current state of the shroud vs the state it was in when it was still new.
"Lastly, the difficulty must be noticed that while the witnesses of the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries speak of the image as being then so vivid that the blood seemed freshly shed, it is now darkened and hardly recognizable without minute attention. On the supposition that this is an authentic relic dating from the year A.D. 30, why should it have retained its brilliance through countless journeys and changes of climate for fifteen centuries, and then in four centuries more have become almost invisible? On the other hand if it be a fabrication of the fifteenth century this is exactly what we should expect."
Yeah, I always expect religious people to be gullible liars.
So the theory is that a man was crucified and wrapped in an incredibly rare and expensive piece of linen, which would have been incredibly unusual since people who were crucified at the time were left on the crosses as a warning to others to obey the authorities. Or the bodies were disposed of in a mass grave. But the body was carefully wrapped in this linen and after being dead for a couple days this man came back to life and unwrapped himself and left the guarded tomb (again there is no logic to a crucified man being put in an expensive tomb and then for it to be guarded). And then someone had the warewithal to go collect this piece of linen and properly store it and care for it for over 1,300 years and wisely move it to a Christian church in northern France. Seems completely reasonable.
Sure, it's a one in a million chance. But everyone knows that those crop up nine times out of ten.
Wherewithal*
You make a strong case.. it’s not absolutely impossible. 😁
It could have got to France on a boat built from fragments of the True Cross. Can anyone prove that it didn't? Case proven. 😉😛
I agree with most of what you’re saying, but, according to the Bible, Joseph of Arimathea had Jesus taken down, properly dressed, and entombed, requests which were honored due to Joseph’s status and the Romans not wanting to push the tense relations with the Jews any farther. So that chunk, at least, has already been addressed as far as the logic goes.
That said, the Shroud is absolutely BS, on every level.
Mel Gibson was my first celebrity crush, and I'm not sure there's anything more embarrassing in my life.
We listen and do not judge. 🙏🏿
Mel Gibson told this lie, and then his house burned down.
Maybe not a good idea to lie about god
He was awesome when he was young and made some great movies, but unfortunately, his person isn't good.
I loved the very first Mad Max movie. It's a classic
I, for one, don't know how to love him. He's just a man
Come onnnnn he was pretty hot
It ses to me that of you want to argue that a new dating method is superior to existing methods, you should test it on objects of known age, not of objects who's age is contentious.
One objection that I never see made, and that I think should be made, is that the image does not match the image one would expect to find created by a body wrapped in a shroud (which would have encircled the body) or even draped across the body (which would have distorted the face). The image is that of a rigid photographic plate suspended above, and below the body.
Even back when I was still a Christian, I always thought it was obvious the Shroud was a fake.
You still have time to come back
The propaganda is effective only when you stifle critical thought. This isn't philosophy this is a science claim, if there is a method delivery to even character the totals necessary from different tests/procedures, then it's plausible it is natural( it makes sense on both sides of the argument - there is only natural no matter how you wish to extend science further- and miracles must be traceable otherwise science( an on going, and never complete studying of nature) will be silent to the how and especially specifically when or who.
The first red flag was seeing Joe Rogan and Mel Gibson.
Exactly.
Alex Jones will have both on soon ...
Gibson's House burned down while he was in this interview.
The first red flag was the claim the Shroud was authentic...
@@helenaconstantinethat's gotta be coincidence, God wouldn't do him like that. Well, unless he was trying to teach him something.
The fact that the Shroud of Turin is, well, a shroud is a major piece of evidence against it being authentic. Jewish burial practices at the time did not make use of a single piece of cloth. Rather it was strips of cloth being wrapped around the body. In fact the Gospel of John (19:40) specifically describes Jesus's body being wrapped in strips of cloth.
I know someone who lost their job over the "Virgin Mary" water stain in Tampa/Clearwater FL back in 1996. She went there to camp out and worship bc she believed it was a "miracle". She was fired for calling in sick for a week & then getting spotted on the news by her boss. 😅
People still go there to pray 30 years later. They argue that bc it "appeared" just before Christmas & it looks a lot like the way people who have never seen Mary painted her in the 15th century, it has to be a manifestation from God! If you've never seen it you should Google it. My point is once they latch on to a "miracle" that "proves" what they believe, you can't explain to them how water splatter patterns are unique & that pattern is in line with every other water pattern & no magic had to be involved to create it - none of that matters. The shroud is more complicated than the water stain but watching Mel reminded me so much of that lady trying to explain why she believed the water stain was a miracle.
One could make a very crude joke about Mary and miraculous splatter patterns.
@@jakeaurod
I once lived in apartment next door to a woman who had a religious experience at least three nights each week. 😮
The image on the shroud looks suspiciously like Howard Stern!
Well, at one point in the 90's, he WAS very vocal in telling anyone and everyone that he was "the King of all media!" Maybe he WAS the inspiration for the shroud! See, the lizardmen who mated with human females (and still do!) probably spawned Howard Stern, putting their faith in him as the savior of the world but then, somehow, the lizardmen took a mold of Howard's face and got in their time machine and...🤣😂👽🤖🤡💯
The hairstyle of a Jewish man from the first century... and the hairstyle of a couple hundred thousand men and women at Woodstock in 1969. And the hairstyle of a few billion other people before, between and since.
Doesn’t the Bible itself refute the shroud of Turin? I distinctly remember reading that Jesus was wrapped in strips of linen…strips being plural? Not one big body length single strip?
They were were atomically woven together at the Rez. Come on bro YHWH is a master weaver.
it's a mistranslation, it should say shroud,
and did in the original, before NASA got their greedy paws on it
@@Merrick I thought it was The Illuminati, not NASA.
I just read that Gibson was appearing on Rogan's show... while his house was burning down?
"Oh Lord, why will you not send us a sign?"
The curse of fire strikes again! 😅
Iirc the shroud survived fire two or three times in its recorded history. I have always taken it as a sign that god wanted to get rid of it.
Geez, Mel is usually so level headed and analytical 😏
If by that you mean overbearing and blowhard, then I agree. 😉
The SoT is an excellent candidate for carbon 14 dating. C14 dating says it is Medieval. There is no rational reason to dispute this, unless you think "lying to get money" is a rational reason.
Dan, you da man! I love the way you present your information and have learned a lot.
It’s so sad to me that people try to make the Shroud of Turin into something it’s not. It’s such a cool piece of art and history on its own.
And so many people believe in stuff like this, without questioning.
They are desperate for any kind if physical evidence to support their beliefs, If your faith is in only what you can see and touch, you have no faith at all! "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." (Hebrews 11:1)
Wait wait wait... Jesus was 6 feet tall? That's huge for the people in the region!
Who knew that Mel is an expert on first century C.E. hairstyles?
and why would Paul tell Christians to keep their hair short if he saw a resurrected Jesus with long hair?
He's just really good at spotting Jews, no matter the time period
We are getting dumber by the day.
@@JoeDitzel That would explain Joe Rogan's popularity, as well as the winner of the 2024 US presidential election.
Smh...
I, too used to believe that a whole room full of experts didn't know how to carbon date a piece of cloth. Fortunately, I snapped out of it.
It is really amazing how many people, even today, still use the Shroud of Turin as 'it was Jesus'.
"now I've never checked that", but you are happy sharing it on one of your largest platforms to date, Mel?
I don't understand some Christians' need for science to prove them right. Like they don't understand the "I willingly choose to believe this highly improbable series of stories in the hope it works out really well for me after I die, even though it could well be a load of nonsense" part of faith.
It’s a vain attempt at giving the Bible way more credibility than it deserves
That's not a part of faith. The word 'faith' has been much abused by modern English. It doesn't mean 'believing without evidence'; it means 'trusting the promises'. Completely different thing.
🎯 💯⚛️
@ What is it called when you don’t have faith in those who supposedly made these “promises”?
@@egalitarian-rex it's called 'not having faith'?
Interesting fact about the hair mark: there is absolutely no way that a human body wrapped in a shroud and left in a laying position would have left that sort of imprint. The hair should have been floating. According to Luigi Garlaschelli, who made an accurate replica of the shroud, the face was made by placing a bas-relief under the fabric and painting over it. This explains a strange mark in the neck region that doesn't match any anatomical structure. The rest of the body was painted in the same way, over the body of some guy.
Any artist that works in 3D on computers with 2D textures formed to the 3D surface, knows that the shroud is fake. What you described as the method of creating the shroud is correct.
It really looks like it was pressed lol
The more one listens to Joe Rogan, the more one’s brain shrinks.
skibidi toilet> joe rogan
my hypothesis is that they used a form of rust "dyeing" you have iron items wrapped in vinegar soaked material make sure the material is firmly attached to the metal and keep moist with vinegar for about a week. its a sort of burn, a chemical reaction between the rust and the mild acid.
Depends on whether you consider 600 years old to be ancient.
If Mel Gibson told me my golden retriever is a golden retriever I'd be convinced he was a Shitsu. Love your work.
8:58 "No that's not real - And the fit for this video..." Like a mic drop :D
It’s a King Arthur forgery! 🤣
Thank you for addressing this one!
This is another example of the danger of wanting to believe something to the point you invent justifications. Confirmation bias, no more no less.
Joe Rogan just mimics the Tucker Carlson "Hey I'm just asking questions..." schtick, but tries to conjure an air of credibility for it by performing it, unlike Tucker does, with a mellow delivery.
Yup, he has mastered the art of JAQing off on camera for money.
There's more evidence of Santa Claus being real than the Shroud of Turin.
Well yea, we actually have records of his mortal life in Turkey. And the remains of his body.
Ho! Ho! Ho!
I met santa claus at the mall last year
Those presents under the tree have to be coming from *somewhere*! Do you have a better explanation? Checkmate asantaists!
@@MegaBearsFan Did you know that, according to Christian Mythology, Santa raised just as many people from the dead as Jesus.
But while Jesus raised whole people, Santa raised three children that were chopped up and brined to be sold as pork in a famine. Truly a superior miracle worker.
The only things I hear when I see the face of Mel Gibson are the utterly racist voicemails he left on his ex-wife's phone.
The weave pattern on the cloth hadn't been invented by the time Jesus was said to be crucified.
The Tiberian coin thing is very unlikely because we have no evidence of coins with Tiberius' head circulating in Jesus' lifetime in Judea.
I'd rather believe the bible spoof "Wholly Moses" before I'd believe any apologist or Mel Gibson.
The shroud is a medieval prop.
I read somewhere that his house was burning in LA while he was with JR.
Joe Rogan is what the incurious think curiosity looks like.
Interesting history: A 3-D rendition of the shroud is on display in the Catholic Chapel at the US Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs CO. This is because one of the professors was obsessed with the shroud and commissioned a young artist, who happened to be a member of my church in Denver, to create a cardboard model of the 3-D image which was then encased with fiber glass and put on display in the chapel. This was 1979 I believe.
I can't believe that the "-what is your source, bro?" - I saw it in a dream" meme became real
The shroud is a pretty cool artifact, but pretty clearly fake.
Joe Rogan and Mel Gibson - the cutting edge of archeological research, folks!
It looks goofy as hell
@aahhhhhhhhhhhhh - Yeah, it's pretty consistent with the religious art of the medieval period in terms of depictions of the human form and the wounds.
I meant more about how the fibers are individually colored or dyed and then woven, and not clumped together as if they were slathered with paint.
Thank you Dan as usual . "Game Set & Match". As one Born, Baptised, and Confirmed into the "Roman Catholic" Church. When It existed , pre Vatican II. I was taught that the "Shroud of Turin"
Was not an article of faith and that it was most probably a medieval artistic object. You could believe it was genuine if you wanted to but that was a personal choice. I have always rejected any claims of" proof" for anything to do with biblical or the Jesus narrative. I regard the peddlers of such claims as Quacks and Charlatans Agents of deception.
Idk why people are obsessed about the shroud. It's not in any way verifiable evidence of the biblical claims, and it's definitely not a 2000-year fabric 🤦🏾♂️.
The point is to give the "resurrection" credibility, that Jesus was really in a tomb etc.
1:40 Could someone please refer to me what bishop said that about the Shroud because I’m extremely curious?
His name was Pierre d'Arcis. He sent a letter to Pope Clement VII in the late 1300s that said that an artist had confessed to him to painting the shroud. I don't know the artist's name or if he had done it nefariously or if he created it for someone who chose to use it as a forgery.
Pierre d'Arcis
Quick check on wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Shroud_of_Turin) opens saying it was Bishop Pierre d'Arcis in 1390 AD. I think that's who Dan was referring to.
According to Wikipedia "History of the Shroud of Turin" it was Bishop Pierre d'Arcis
Thanks everyone!!
❤❤❤❤❤❤thanks Dan!!!!
Carbon dated to be about 700 years old.
What the hell Mel? How about just chuck it all up to being still shrouded in mystery?
This is why scholars like Dan need to be checked: he says @ 5:16 , " he can reproduce all the features of the shroud..."
If you actually look at Garlachelli's mock-up, it lacks the resolution of the shroud in the nose area, very close but not quite!
Mel Gibson does his own research!
Any artist that works in 3D on computers with 2D textures formed to the 3D surface, knows that the shroud is fake.
Yea that's why no one came up with that scenario until the dude who did just that put out the video on it last year. The shroud is fake but don't premise yourself as some kind of intellect that knew before that video came out.
@ LOL I've been working in 3D since 1990! I had the original beta version of 3D Studio, for verification: The Help button just said "This is help"!
Exactly. I'm not an artist, but it's always seemed obvious to me that a shroud wrapped over a 3D face would not produce an image like a regular photograph. The face on the shroud should be stretched and warped and have folds in the cloth where it wasn't touching any skin.
@@johnphantom Cool story- no one came up with that explanation until last year when the dude put that video out showing exactly what you claim. So basically you held out your great wisdom on the world for 30 years?
I seriously doubt that.
This is not just 1 year old. Specifically, I remember in 1996 when I saw the textures for the 3D models of Quake, I knew then the shroud was fake. You can find these textures from 1996 for yourself.
I love Dan's - _"no that's not real and the fit..."_
i remember 10 years ago when rogan being an idiot was still a bit hidden
"Authentic" how?
Rogue and Gambit or Rogan Gambit?
And it looks exactly like Jesus. 😂😂🤣
It's a 2D image. A 3D person would have shroud wrapping around face and body and thighs. Like skins for a video game, look at a face before it is applied to the mess.
I've never heard a good explanation for the face looking like a photograph. To cover all of the terrain of a face, and show the creases of the lips, eye sockets, and corners of the nose, you'd need to push a flat cloth into those recesses. And then when that cloth is laid flat it is not going to look like the face in the Shroud of Turin, or any kind of recognizable human face. The features should be stretched and distorted the same way continents are on a Mercator projection map.
Usually when I bring this up, proponents of the Shroud say that Jesus radiated some kind of magical energy as he left his body. Which, of course, has no actual supporting evidence.
If Mel said it, it can't be true.
Gee, if Mel says it, how could it be false?
I'm like Fox Mulder...I want to believe. How wild would it be if it were real but I find it hard to believe it is.
Gibson lost his fucking mind years ago.
The real issue is not about the shroud of Turin. The real issue is JRE having 10's of millions listening to his show and believing him and his guests.
My own grandmother used to buy the Enquirer each week while at the grocery. When I asked why she would buy such a rag of lies, she'd respond "they couldn't print it if it wasn't true".
Did they find out it's blood type AB? AB in Hebrew means father.
In this case it means All Bullshit!
Could you talk about the Mandylion/Image of Edessa and the Keramion in relation to the shroud of Turin? Is there any truth to people making connections between them? Or even that the Mandylion is the Shroud
Mel Gibson spouting nonsense and Joe Rogan just saying “yyyeeeaaahhhh”
Funny stuff
Thats Joe Rogans whole thing, the biggest sole conduit of misinfo on planet Earth.
Perfect Friday shirt.
Good to see Dan refuting the claims made by Mel Gibson, a religious wack job and Joe Rogan who seems to believe utterly whomever sits in front of him.
Rogue and Gambit Forever!!! GuarOntee
oh boy, mel gibson
I guess Mel Gibson played himself in Lethal Weapon, a suicidal maniac that only does the right thing entirely by accident.
Did not the Bishop of Troyes say it was a forgery by the Bishop of Troyes Pierre d’Arcis in 1389?
Tim Hogan of the Knights Templars says the shroud was created by Da Vinci for the Pope .
Mel Gibson? A scholar? No way. I would not give one red cent for his opinion.
Wow, this makes me reconsider my position.
I was under the impression that features of the shroud remain inexplicable, and that the anatomy and hematology were all but perfect.
I remember watching a documentary on the original investigation, how one scientist on the team (Raymond Rogers) changed his mind from a medieval dating when presented with new data and theory about a medieval fire, and a repair section sewn onto the shroud.
How do you explain the image consisting on only the surface layer of the cloth? And why are they trying to recreate it with UV laser technology if it's obviously a medieval forgery?
The anatomy is, in fact, seriously flawed. The arms are too long and if a dead body were lying prone the arms would not stay in that position.
there are also problems with the head being out of proportion to the body, which suggests an artist made the image of the head separately.
Congrats on being open to changing your mind by the way!
@@OldMotherLogo thanks. I'll have to look back into all the literature on this.
Why do the heathens so furiously rage? Is there a special calling for"Liars for Jesus"
And getting more ancient every day. Just wait it'll be ancient in no time.
I have that shirt!!! Oh my goodness!
Mel brings dogma and Dan brings the data 😊
Of course it's Mel pushing this BS on Rogan. Imagine that.😂
Shroud has always looked like amateur tie dye to me 🤣
I'm fairly familiar with WAXS , the technique mentioned. There are no publications using it for dating. Those guys introduce the technique and a bunch of assumptions and test a single fabric, the shroud. It smells BS, until someone tests a bunch of ancient fabrics.
Are they still touting that piece of cloth? It seems there's more than one born every minute.
The shroud isn't even anatomically correct. It lacks the top of the head. It goes from the face on one side to the back of the head after the fold.
Exactly. I like to point this out as the most obvious proof that it's fake. Unfortunately, people will just ignore this and change the subject when it's pointed out in a debate.
while I agree the Shroud is clearly medieval artwork I think this is a poor objection. The preferred hypothesis among Shroudies is that Jesus' image was made like a photograph on each side of the cloth (using neutron radiation hocus pocus) which, while a bad explanation overall, does explain this aspect of the appearance. They do not think it's a giant sweat stain.