Let’s start with an analogy, shall we? It’s a famous plane crash that took place in Iceland, 1973, The wreckage remains to this day as a tourist attraction, still attracting speculation as to precise causes..
And here are a few words from the internet that accompany a tourist guide to the Iceland plane wreck.
The epic plane wreck on the black beach in South Iceland
In 1973 a United States Navy DC plane ran out of fuel and crashed on the black beach at Sólheimasandur, in the South Coast of Iceland. Fortunately, everyone in that plane survived. Later it turned out that the pilot had simply switched over to the wrong fuel tank.
Sad to say, I can’t be as succinct in describing the wreck that is Air Sindonology. It will need a sizeable number of numbered points. But the parallel with the Iceland plane wreck is interesting. Why? Because both crashes were arguably due to the same reason – switching over to the wrong fuel tank, real for the US Navy DC3 above, while metaphorically speaking for Air Sindonology!
1. Stop calling it a “shroud“. Read the bible, the first 3 Gospels especially setting out the intervention by “Joseph of Arimathea and his “fine linen”. Forget “shroud”, with its burial connotations. Think simply “retrieval linen”, i.e. retrieval from cross to tomb, whether genuine, or more likely, a medieval mock-up (“simulation”). “Burial” and its connotations ( invariably with quick fast-forward to Resurrection on the Third Day) supplied the wrong kind of fuel.
2. Think “Veil of Veronica” mode of imprinting, where one focuses on end -result, a recognizable image, more specifically imprint, indeed negative tone-reversed imprint. (Ring any bells?). No need to dwell just yet on details like imprinting ingredients, mechanism, resemblance to subject etc.
The Veil of Veronica association could be considered the right kind of fuel that allows lift-off and keeps one airborne.
3. Yes. Veil of Veronica :ante mortem ‘captured likeness’ (FACE only)
J of A’s retrieval linen, aka TS, post-mortem ‘captured likeness’ (ENTIRE UNCLOTHED BODY).
4. If a retrieval linen, then the double image, faint, negative, bloodstains etc is almost certainly one formed by actual physical contact, whether real or modelled. Contact-imprinting – the right kind of fuel, or should be if wishing to get airborne and stay airborne.
5. Think of the linen NOT in terms of Resurrection, or even Rogers‘ ‘naturalistic’ post-mortem decomposition products etc.
Wrong kind of fuel. Think of it as a sweat/ blood IMPRINT. Right kind of fuel.
6. Forget about imaging across air gaps (based on assumption of authenticity assuming/fixated loosely draped linen) and then drop wacky unscientific ideas about the negative image being the result of supernatural proto-photography via radiation. Wrong kind of fuel.
7. Claim for imaging across air gaps (!) failed to take proper account of a more credible medievally-devised imprinting where the linen is manually pressed against a body, reaching shallow recessed relief, e.g. sides of nose, not just the prominent bridge of nose and/or other ‘high points’ of body relief.
8. OK, so let’s drop the notion that body image is some kind of photograph, read wrong kind of fuel,. So let’s move on, and take a close and deeply sceptical look at the claim that the body image is confined entirely to the outermost layer of the linen fibres (PCW, a mere 200 nm thick), allegedly much too superficial to be man-made (!).
Er, where’s the hard evidence for that claim? See previous posting for answer. Answer: zilch, one big fat zero.
Oh, and since when has man been incapable of generating superficial layers? (Ben Franklin showed how to do it in the 18th century – simple put a drop or two of oil onto the surface of a pond!)
Answer (briefly summarised): nowhere to be found! Much verbiage, much “suggestion” but not a shred of hard evidence, just postulates pretending to be established fact. Read: wrong kind of fuel.
Pseudoscience (the wrong kind if fuel) is alive and well, unashamedly so in the case of sindonology.
9: See recent evidence from a model system (my Model 10!) that faint fuzzy images may at first glance look superficial to the unaided eye but need not be. Appearances can be deceptive. Look at them under the microscope and be prepared for a surprise.
See preceding posting.
Analogy: a suntan may look superficial, despite being 5 layers deep in the outermost layer of skin (epidermis):
Again, see previousposting
Interlude comment: some folk getting this far may wonder why, of all the mishaps involving aircraft, I have chosen this particular one.
Well, here’s a tiny clue. It involves the US Navy, which has a training academy in California that awards its own academic doctorates “(PhD degrees!” no less). Yes, really! Talk about usurping the longstanding institutions of the civilian world. Talk about the unacceptable face of the US of A!
So what’s so special about the US Navy and a particular aircraft owned by the US Navy that was launched in the 1970s, but then quickly ran intoi trouble, with the pilot trying alternatives to conventional science-based fuel?
Ever heard of the House That Jack Built? Yes, you probably have.
But have you heard about the “house”, correction, sindonological aircraft that Jack’s son built? Shame it tried to fly on substitutes for real fuel, like Rogers’ vapour, like Jack’s son own uv radiation, whether supplied from the Sun, or something even Higher 😉
No quick return to Planet Earth you realize, flying as it does in the upper reaches of the stratosphere.
Guess what? It’s ever so gradually falling out the sky as we speak! Fuel problem?
Thursday Feb 14
Here’s a Valentine’s Day greeting card to my followers. Actually, it’s a plate from Mark Antonacci’s 2000 “Resurrection of the Shroud” (the title betraying the author’s supernaturalist stance!).
It introduces the topic, dare I say needless distraction of, guess what?
Yes. What you see is a ‘worst case scenario’ (WCS) , namely that so-called lateral, aka ‘wrap-around’ distortion which from the early days of STURP was used to rule image-imprinting via direct contact out of contention (followed in short order by those radiation-based photography models that allowed imaging across air gaps).
Yes, that hideous WCS is the result of allowing the linen to make contact with the sides of the head, together with some accompanying imprinting mechanism. Then you do indeed get wrap-around distortion (WAD). Why? Because the linen is removed and laid flat after imprinting. Imprinting of sides – if allowed to happen, means one gets “lateral distortion” – the making the image too wide, and totally hideous and non life-like (which has been dubbed Agamemnon’s mask).
My response? Irrelevant – totally and utterly irrelevant, not to say grossly misleading. Why?
Look at the TS double body image! One of its most noteworthy features is it showing square-on frontal and dorsal views only, NO sides (no top of head either). One might as well be looking at cardboard cut-outs. Leaving aside the implications (that one’s looking at contact imprints, somewhat stylized one might think, that are tone-reversed negatives- NOT paintings, NOT photographs) how can there be lateral distortion due to ‘excessive-imaging’ of sides if the IMAGE HAS NO SIDES (for whatever reason)?
So what caused that imprinting monstrosity which legal attorney Antonacci chose to highlight in his book you might ask? Was it a real unavoidable result? Or, less charitably, was it one deliberately contrived to present a worst case scenario (WCS) as if real – indeed unavoidable? Are we seeing the technique of the attorney at work, intent on demolishing an opponent’s case using techniques that are the antithesis of the scientific method, the latter at least attempting to display an open enquiring mind, freed if only temporaily of preconceptions?
Invoking that “lateral distortion” as clincher argument against imprinting could be seen as springing a leak in Air Sindonology’s main fuel tank, such that 40 years later the aircraft is still gently gliding earthwards, without the least sign of concern on the face of the air crew
Might there be a way of avoiding WAD, one that’s not rocket science ? Why yes – like NOT allowing the linen to make contact with the sides! Alternatively, don’t apply imprinting medium to the sides. It then doesn’t matter a jot if the linen makes contact with the sides! Avoiding the WCS of wrap-around distortion ain’t rocket science – it’s merely requires commonsense and a minor modification of practical technique.
In my Model 10, white flour is sprinkled onto the subject from above, settling on the horizontal relief, with scarcely any attaching to vertical sides. After shaking off excess flour, the coated subject is then draped with wet linen, and the latter pressed against the coated subject by pressing down vertically, avoiding the sides.
Guess what: NO WRAP-AROUND IMPRINTING MEANS NO WRAP-AROUND DISTORTION.
Interlude: Oh yes, one final word about our arch-authenticity-promoting Mark Antonacci, he of the no-holds-barred defence/prosecution tendency.
Am I the only one to think that the cover design of his 2000 books was – how can I put this delicately – BANG OUT OF ORDER.
Yes, it’s to do with the artist’s hint as to the manner AND timing of image acquisition, with no hint that timing was postponed till “Resurrection”. Instead, the artist seems to be saying, correctly in my view, that an image might have been acquired in the process of deposition from cross and/or subsequent transport to tomb, in Joseph of Arimathea’s makeshift linen sling/stretcher – NOT on the Third Day.
Stop Press (Feb 16)
Here’s are two snapshots taken in the last half hour, with the very first attempt to model the Turin Linen body image (more specifically, faintness and diffuse nature thereof) using an inflated white balloon (“PCW”) and pipe cleaners (a mix of coloured and uncoloured to represent “microfibrils”). See Commenst for details – copied also to Dan Porter’s site.
Appendix 1 (image required for posting elsewhere)
Appendix 2 (as above, needed elsewhere)