i was watching a program that said that the carbon dating system used on the shroud seemed to prove it wrong, however many scientists especially creation scientists seem to be not so sure about the validity of the whole carbon dating process and on top of that the imprint on the shroud were clearly of a man who was killed by crucifixtion
2007-05-02 17:21:19 · 20 answers · asked by chris d 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Fake.
2007-05-02 17:24:27 · answer #1 · answered by beano™ 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Creation Scientist ? Never heard of such a thing. Creation is gods work not science. Science is truth not faith. Carbon dating, while not exact, can give a VERY good idea of the age of a object. It's based on the known, and proven, decay of a carbon isotope. I've seen the shroud and while there appears to be an image how can you say " clearly of a man who was killed by crucifixtion". A silhouette with arms crossed and what appears to be a wound to the hand, how does that prove it was Crucifixion. Also thousands were crucified by the Romans so how can they say this is christ? The only thing that makes it the shroud of christ is faith. Testing says otherwise.
2007-05-03 00:47:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The supposed shroud has been proven a fake. Not only carbon dating but the cloth itself has been proven to be no where near old enough
2007-05-03 00:37:40 · answer #3 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Of course creation scientists (if you can really call them scientists) try to make carbon dating seem invalid....it blows their whole "young earth" hypothesis. The shroud is a fake. Yet another horrible fiction that has duped the gullible.
2007-05-03 00:26:33 · answer #4 · answered by Medusa 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm no sindonologist, but I believe the shroud has been proven to be a work of art from a much later period. I'd love to see it up close, just the same. Not that I could tell anything just by looking, but it would be fascinating to see for myself.
2007-05-03 00:24:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is not Christ for Christ's sake. It was proven wrong a while back. Of course creation "scientists" are going to say the validity of carbon dating is wrong. These yahoos think the world is only 4000 years old.
2007-05-03 00:25:00 · answer #6 · answered by dawnsdad 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
While the shroud is an interesting article it will do little to help a person spiritually.
If you want to see something interesting that just may change your life take the test below.
~Neeva
2007-05-03 00:24:39 · answer #7 · answered by Neeva C 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't really think a piece of fabric would last 2000 years... no matter whose dead body it was wrapped around.
I kind of agree with the whole questioning of carbon dating. Who says that opperation (decomposition of carbon isotopes) has always happened at the same rate?
2007-05-03 00:52:41 · answer #8 · answered by Yoda's Duck 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it was shown to be from a time period that didn't coincide with the time of Jesus... It's either a fake or an error.
[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.
Post script: Somebody mentioned "creation scientists." That's a laugh - people who are out to prove that fallacies are true are not scientists but frauds.
2007-05-03 00:30:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well there is the whole problem that two different pigments have been found on it. The head is out of proportion, and the front and back images are different sizes.
It was a very cleaver fake from the middle ages.
2007-05-03 00:27:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's been proven to be a fraud, so there's not much to think of it.
And even if it were genuinely the image of a man killed by crucifixion, they did that quite a bit back in the day so it could be anyone.
2007-05-03 00:27:52 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋