The Bloodstains On The Shroud Of Turin Are Probably Fake, Say Forensic Experts

[jpak]

https://www.buzzfeed.com/danvergano/shroud-turin-jesus-fake-bloodstain?utm_term=.px6PbveXQ#.kwvlrkD8K

The Shroud of Turin, long considered by some to be the burial cloth of Jesus, has inconsistent bloodstain patterns that suggest it is a fake, a new forensic investigation has found.

Held in the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, the shroud bears an image of a crucified man. It has been analyzed for decades, to some controversy, with radiocarbon dating determining its origin to be between 1260 and 1390. It is regarded by the Vatican as an icon, rather than a genuine religious relic. More than 2 million people came to see the shroud during a three-month display in 2015, including Pope Francis.

The bloodstain pattern investigation reported on Tuesday by the Journal of Forensic Sciences is the first such analysis of the cloth, looking at its purported blood splatters and their alignment to each other in a kind of crime scene analysis. The researchers concluded that the linen appears patched with bloodstains from a standing model, not a crucified man or facedown corpse, adding to evidence that the shroud is a medieval fraud.

“This is the kind of forensic work done all the time in police investigations,” Matteo Borrini, a forensic scientist at Liverpool John Moores University in the United Kingdom, told BuzzFeed News. “Even a crucified or hanging person should leave a distinct blood pattern on the cloth, which would be fascinating information to have.”

<more>

[NightWatcher]

1. Next you'll be telling me that the Tooth Fairy didn't leave a quarter under my pillow when I was 6.

Religion is a con.

[jpak]

2. The Tooth Fairy didn't leave a quarter under your pillow when you were 6.

[CanonRay]

7. But Trey Gowdy is still going to investigate

to see if Hillary put the quarter there...

[frogmarch]

3. The bloodstains may be real bloodstains,

added to make the thing look authentic, but the Shroud of Turin is a fake.

[Downtown Hound]

4. Fake news. Sad.

Sorry, I couldn't resist it.

[PoliticAverse]

5. Back in 1979-80 Dr Walter McCrone examined the shroud and concluded it was red paint...

based on electron microscopy and X-ray diffraction analysis.

See: https://www.mccroneinstitute.org/v/64/The-Shroud-of-Turin

[Siwsan]

6. Maybe I'm weird, but I always thought that image looked more like a Viking.

[jalan48]

8. Hey, sometimes superstition needs a little boost.

[LakeArenal]

9. I think I heard it was a da Vinci.

Self portrait scam. Pretty sure I heard it from some believable source.

[bitterross]

10. No shit. It depicts a European man after all.

It appeared in the 14th century and depicts a distinctly European person. It is just another fake "Holy Relic" put together by men of the time to make money off the pilgrims.

[Xolodno]

11. ...and never mind the fact that...

...the image of the person doesn't even look remarkably middle eastern.

Should be recognized as an art work, plain and simple.