Tag Archives: STURP

Shroud Question 1 from David Goulet: it’s to do with the testability of my 14th century flour-imprinting model.

HERE’S THE FIRST QUESTION FOR THIS SITE’S NEW SHAMELESSLY  MODEL-PROMOTING FEEDBACK-SEEKING NEW FORMAT (and it’s a corker – the question that is). It’s from that wise and perceptive Canadian author  (“Looney Tombs”) David Goulet, and was in fact posted nigh … Continue reading

Posted in new theory, Shroud of Turin, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 4 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.

This is the second instalment of a 3-part series that looks at uv-fluorescence of model scorch imprints and/or burn marks in general. See the posting immediately preceding this one for a brief introduction, stating the long-overdue need to re-evaluate a … Continue reading

Posted in Shroud of Turin, Turin Shroud | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments

Change of direction

Firstly, I shall be wasting no more time on the shroudstory.com site. It is simply a mouthpiece (with some very mouthy contributors*) for the pro-authenticity, anti-radiocarbon dating agenda. Its host, Dan Porter,  is almost certainly a front man for a … Continue reading

Posted in medieval forgery, Shroud of Turin | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

STURP got its priorities entirely wrong. Result – no real scientific insights.

Strange. I was going through the transcript of Barrie Schwortz’s TV interview yesterday (the subject of the previous posting) and was deciding how to tackle, indeed whether to tackle at all, his assertion that no group of scientists could have … Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mr. Barrie Schwortz, President of STERA Inc: please stop proselytizing narrative-driven so-called science.

Apologies to early birds: I shall be composing this posting in real time.  Yes I know I should be assembling in draft mode, and only hit the Send button when complete and polished. But I’m more a comments than posting … Continue reading

Posted in Shroud of Turin, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Raymond N Rogers: STURP supremo chemist (RIP) who sadly lost the plot (due to an apparent blind spot, it would seem, for those ultra-thin and highly superficial primary cell walls of flax and linen fibres).

The original introduction here, setting out my strategy for dealing for Ray Rogers’ formidable set of FAQs  has now been deleted as being  ‘past their sell-by-date’. It is now 16:40, Wednesday 9th Jan, all the major points of contention (and … Continue reading

Posted in Shroud of Turin | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 35 Comments

An open letter to the President of the Royal Society. Would you and your Fellows be willing to assist in separating the science from the pseudoscience?

Draft letter to Sir Paul Nurse PRS This posting has now been updated.  Read by all means, but then check out  the new one here, March 2013: From wiki: “… ( Sir Paul) Nurse believes that scientists should speak out … Continue reading

Posted in Shroud of Turin | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments