Image of my own (beardless!) face, obtained in 2015 via contact imprinting technique, easily realizable in medieval times.
Pre-imprinting! (purely a modern photo as distinct from medieval -type imprint!)
Latest Comments
Conflicting definitions of “sindonology”
1. First, from en.wiktionary
“The study of the Shroud of Turin from a believing perspective”
2. Second, from www.dictionary.
“The scientific study of the Shroud of Turin”
Er, they can’t both be right! Indeed they could be said to be pulling in opposite directions!
So why hasn’t sindonology put its house in order by agreeing on a SINGLE DEFINITION?
Tag Archives: Barrie M.Schwortz
No, Mr. Barrie M. Schwortz. STURP did NOT “provide an example that future Shroud researchers can use to carefully plan their own work”. STURP showed how not to plan or execute objective, ISSUE- RELEVANT science-based research!
Prequel (added Nov 6, 2018): Have just discovered that my targeted criticisms of the 1978 STURP initiative were voiced way back in May 2015 on my now long-in-the-tooth science buzz site. (That site having been started in 2009, … Continue reading →
Posted in Shroud of Turin
|
Tagged Barrie M.Schwortz, STURP, unwarranted advice to scientists
|
8 Comments
Does thermally-induced scorching of linen ALWAYS produce fluorescence under uv, rendering it invalid as a model for the Turin Shroud? Answer: most definitely NO.
2015 preamble: Hello dear site visitor. Welcome to the site. You have chosen to check out a 2015 posting. 2015 was my breakthrough year. Up till then I’d been wedded to direct scorching of hot metal template (whether fully 3D … Continue reading →
Posted in Shroud of Turin, Turin Shroud
|
Tagged Barrie M.Schwortz, Dan Porter, geoffroi de charny, king john II, ransom theory, scorch, shroudstory.com, STERA, STURP, thermal imprinting, uv fluorescence, uv lamp
|
11 Comments
My answer to the steeped-in-mystique Turin Shroud - evolving gradually from some 10 years of science-based experimental modelling. 