Top Scientist DEFENDS New Shroud Of Turin Evidence (Dr. Liberato De Caro)

[@CapturingChristianity]

I probably should've mentioned this in the video, but the interview with Dr. De Caro was actually conducted over email. I initially invited him to do a video interview, but he declined-likely because he’s Italian and not fluent in English. He did say he’d be open to a written interview, though, so that’s the route we took. I sent him my questions, and he responded after a couple of days, probably using a translator. I didn’t change anything in his answers, aside from noting that links he mentioned are in the video description. To make things a bit more dynamic, I used AI-generated images and voices instead of just reading the whole thing myself. I noticed some of you in the comments aren't fans of that approach, and that’s okay. A lot of people are fine with it, and that’s okay too. Just wanted to give you all a little background on how this interview came together.

[@MrEliwankenobi]

Thank you for Clarifying this. I was about to comment- WHAT ARE YOU DOING?!! Haha.

[@_the__void_]

I strongly recommend you watch Dr Falk's reply to Cameron, which shows serious issues with the methodology used by the team that did this research going back to the retracted 2019 study, right up to the current one.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@_the__void_ No study was retracted by its authors.

[@_the__void_]

@@sliglusamelius8578 I didn't say it was, only that it was retracted. Have you watched Dr Falk's video response?

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@_the__void_ The scientist in this video is not Bertuzzi, the man whom Falk detracted as "not a scientist". The sudarium of Oviedo matches the shroud blood stain and I known to be in a church as early as the 500s. This video says that they have written a rejoinder to the retraction but the journal did not publish it.

[@Satarack]

The AI voice is grating, and it's confusing people. I'd recommend redoing this video where you: 1. Explain upfront that you did a written email interview 2. Show the emails on screen (redacting any personal info), and 3. Read the emails yourself rather than an AI.

[@konstantinoskarampakakis7]

Agree.

[@RapunzelASMR]

agree

[@brando3342]

Agree

[@unsightedmetal6857]

I agree. As a Christian, it’s a little difficult to consider this a real interview with the AI elements in it. I would love it if the emails were shown.

[@tionarry]

He already explained in a community not that he did and would be using an AI

[@topcatcoolio8807]

It also is great for Muslims. Now they know that Jesus DID go to the Cross, and his Holy Spirit came back resurection after 3 days. The power of the light is unbeatable. Leaving all the scars, and damage that the true Gospels recorded. Fantastic !😮 As well as the EYE WITNESS Accounts of those who walked talked and listened to him. Priceless ! The Gospels. Un corrupted, sent out all over the world

[@trentitybrehm5105]

FACTS! However, I feel like the stigma of the Shroud being fake from the carbon dating done in the 80's or 90's (whenever it was) will not now go away magically and will continue to be the go to point for people saying it's fake.

[@trentitybrehm5105]

These next passages are about the Holy Spirit being a separate person from the Father and the Son, and also being God. Matthew 3:16-17 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 15:26-27 But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning. John 16:13-15 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. 2 Samuel 23:2-3 (David calling the Spirit God) “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue. 3 The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me: ‘He who rules over men must be just, Ruling in the fear of God. Acts 5:3-4 (Peter calling the Spirit God) But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it rem ained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

[@litigioussociety4249]

They would just claim Allah left that image of the man he made appear like Jesus to fool those who weren't true followers of Islam.

[@raineeredman6874]

I agree, I knew this was His shroud. I don't need science to prove it

[@jerome8555]

You should learn also about the Sudarium of Oviedo That's the cloth wiped the face of Lord Jesus Please Read about it ​@@raineeredman6874

[@litigioussociety4249]

That AI image is really annoying.

[@Ghost_bros]

I agree all AI images are annoying

[@viktordoe1636]

It was a terrible creative decision to use this AI image with AI voice, at least he could have used an actual photo of the person. I suggest taking down this video, reedit with an actual photo, then reuploading it.

[@daMillenialTrucker]

Y'all some ai haters 😂 that voice though is absolutely annoying 😂😂😂

[@sigurdholbarki8268]

Well don't f***ING look at then! I am amazed at the amount of whiney, entitled children in these comments. Listen to the AI voice if you can bring yourself to, you might actually learn something from the guy that's pioneered one of the most useful archaeological techniques strontium isotope analysis Ffs

[@borneandayak6725]

I love the AI image.

[@Emcron]

perhaps Dr Liberato's actual mugshot would've been better, even if he wasn't keen to give an audio recording...

[@daMillenialTrucker]

That's actually what he looks like, that much I went to verify 😂

[@Emcron]

@@daMillenialTrucker well, colour me impressed!

[@daMillenialTrucker]

@@Emcron *busts out crayons*

[@heavymetarismyway9741]

For some, evidence is not evidence; and no amount of evidence will ever be enough even if they admitted to the evidence. Personally, I don't try and reach atheists anymore, because I don't have the patience for the games and I just get annoyed. God has been making it clear to me that I'm better suited to providing encouragement for my brothers and sisters in Christ; I find this kind of work far more fulfilling. I am glad channels like Capturing Christianity exist to do work people like me aren't cut out to do.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

Good point. Most atheists are impervious to evidence. And they're vile and mean.

[@tobias4411]

To be honest, both atheists and Christians rejects this Medieval forgery, for good reasons. Ken Ham, a prominent Christian apologist and founder of 'Answers in Genesis', does not believe in the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. He argues that the Bible, when read carefully in context, rules out the possibility of the Shroud being the burial cloth of Jesus Christ. I assume you're not a young earth creationist.

[@JakeMika-mt4dy]

As an ex Atheist we can be saved man! Don’t give up ✝️

[@universalflamethrower6342]

People don't look for God, God looks for them, some People can not see nor hear

[@malirk]

I have evidence. Several scientists who tested the Shroud concluded it was likely a medieval creation. Dr. Michael Tite, Dr. Ray Rogers, and Dr. Harry Gove were involved in the 1988 carbon dating tests, which dated the Shroud to between 1260 and 1390 CE. Turin and the Vatican have since tried to discredit these findings by questioning sample contamination, suggesting that environmental factors or repairs to the cloth may have skewed the results. While these scientists stood by their conclusions, the Church has continued to emphasize the Shroud's spiritual significance rather than engaging with these critical analyses.

[@trentitybrehm5105]

I don't like the AI picture placed there istead of the actual man speaking. AI images of humans just don't sit right with me, expecially when used by Christian KZbinrs. I understand the easiness of it and can see why it's used, but I just really prefer either real people or straight cartoons. AI sits right in that un-canny valley for me for some reason lol

[@dr.tafazzi]

Dr. Di Caro released the interview in written form, that's why there is no video of him speaking these words available to show.

[@gabrielethier2046]

​@@dr.tafazzistill could have just put a picture of him

[@jayluss]

Same. I’d even prefer a black screen with white letter transcript over whatever we are doing here. Lol

[@CartoonSlug]

Yeah it's a little weird

[@kernelcorn7716]

It really detracts from his words. There's a still AI image with an AI voice. It feels inauthentic. If an atheist or someone who simply doesnt believe in the shroud sees this, I believe this conversation will drive them further away.

[@TheBanjoShowOfficial]

This was very strange, would’ve preferred if you just told us right out the gate that he did the interview through email and have you read it to us or something, the play acting is kind of odd and jarring to me

[@daMillenialTrucker]

Welcome to the FUTURE! one day, hopefully in my lifetime they can make ai voices that aren't so obvious 😂 it's even worse with the AI has a dang ole accent 😂

[@universalflamethrower6342]

Exactly, he should have just read it out loud

[@tionarry]

He already did

[@samcotten2416]

Please perform a new X-Ray dating analysis on the Sudarium of Oviedo

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

When they superimposed the SUDARIUM on the Shroud it matches perfectly

[@pop6997]

Thankyou Cam. & Dr Liberato De Caro. Incredibly interesting. Any new investigations of the shroud are fascinating. The momentous amount of evidence from the stuurp investigation alone is very convincing. RIP Barry Swartz

[@devaprasanna80]

If the Shroud dates back to the first century, as suggested by the wax X-ray dating, another crucial point linking it to Jesus arises. Historical evidence shows that most individuals who were crucified were not buried in tombs. Instead, they were either left on the cross to be eaten by scavengers or thrown into mass graves, as they were considered criminals. However, in the case of Jesus, we know from the Gospels that He was buried and wrapped in a shroud.

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

Devas. No one else was crucified with a crown of thorns

[@devaprasanna80]

@@TheresaCronin-kc6wz Yep

[@Dr88Black]

You're just parroting the anonymous biblical stories. Where are the extra-biblical writings that back up any of this?

[@alphaomega203]

Burial of bodies was allowed during the period Jesus was crucified if the family or someone requested. Julius Paulus mentions this being allowed as well as the burial ave at Giv'at ha Mitvar, so it is not inconceivable or unlikely that Jesus was buried especially during the Jewish Passover and in keeping with Jewish law.

[@devaprasanna80]

@@Dr88Black We have archaeological evidence, such as a nail found in the heel bone of a man in an ossuary (bone box), showing that, on rare occasions, crucified individuals were allowed a proper burial.

[@TheRockofGod21]

I would love to see a video with someone who is skeptical reviewing the more in depth research with someone who knows quite a lot, like one of the shroud researchers. Not an atheist shroud skeptic, but a fellow Christian, like a Jon McCray or David Wood, to see some real-time responses to things like it's not a painting, the detail of the wounds are too precise, the convergence with blood patterns on the Sudarium of Oviedo, etc. But especially the specific details surrounding the blunder that was the carbon date testing.

[@wipo3654]

I am skeptical because Shroud defenders ignore and/or discredit the Scripture: STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Program 1978-1981) report confirms very good that the Shroud CANNOT BE the authentic burial cloth of Jesus: I. SPICES According to the Gospel of John the body was CERTAINLY wrapped/bound in linen cloths WITH the spices: John 19,39+40 Nicodemus, who had previously come to Jesus at night, also brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. So they took the body of Jesus and wrapped it in linen cloths WITH the spices, according to the Jewish burial custom. So, there must be at least non biodegradable particles and stains like it is claimed for blood. But there was/is EMPHASISED NOTHING. Already that is enough to disprove the Shroud, comparing it with the biblical account. II. IMAGE And the image itself is a contradiction. There is no shading of the bodys' sides and the top of the head? Also the contact-distance pattern of the backside doesn't correspond the forensic pattern of a dead body lying e.g. on a plate. Folds, overlappings and wavy areas are inevitable as shown in a Shroud wrapping simulation video to prove "scientifically" (why without spices?!) the blood stain pattern: III. FAZIT Both, wrapping together with spices never would have resulted in such an undistorted 2D projection image. And other "scientific" discussions are irrelevant as long there is no BIBLICAL evidence that Jesus was wrapped in something like the Shroud. IV. SOURCES (a) Excerpt of STURPs 1981 final report: "Microchemical evaluation has indicated NO EVIDENCE OF ANY SPICES, OILS, or any biochemicals known to be produced by the body in life or in death. It is clear that there has been a DIRECT CONTACT OF THE SHROUD WITH A BODY, which explains certain features such as scourge marks, as well as the blood." (b) Channel: David Rolfe Shroud of Turin - How the Shroud wrapped the body (two parts - the links you can find on my channels' Playlist) (c) The regarding full biblical account is shown in a video presentation on my channel. Click icon W to the left-top of this comment. Watch and refute me where I am biblically-logically wrong.

[@TheRockofGod21]

@@wipo3654 It seems that you're coming from the assumption that what caused the image was the oils from the spices and oil of the burial processes. meaning you believe it to be a contact transference. No serious researcher of the shroud believes that. If you want a more detail, more plausible reason for the Shroud image, then look no further than Matthew 17:1-8, Mark 9:2-8 and Luke 9:28-36 which summarized states "And he was Transfigured before them, and his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them." (mark 9:2-3) The more popular explanation of the image formation is that of RADIATION not of contact transference as with oils and spices. The necessity of the women returning on Sunday to FINISH the burial process points to the plausibility that they didn't use a lot of oil and spices when they wrapped him. So, if your argument is what I think it is, that the image is debunked because it was from the oil and spice and there is no oil and spice residue found on the Shroud, that also fails because the STURP team didn't go there to try and detect oil and spices, they went to look for paint residue. Over the course of time it's possible the oil residue got washed away, or deteriorated. but the common held belief by shroud advocates is that Jesus, upon his resurrection, exploded with Radiation (as he did at the transfiguration) and transposed himself from inside the wrapped cloth to outside the wrapped cloth (which the creator of the universe can do) and it's that radiation that left a 3D (not a 2D) imprint of an image that does not conform to normal contact image transference. Like how the mask of Agamemnon is splayed out. The Shroud doesn't do that because it's not a contact image, its a radiation imprint, which is why the image is only on the top 200 nanometers of the fibrils on the linen. Contact stains like the blood on the Shroud, penetrate ALL THE WAY THROUGH. Oil and Spices (assuming he would have been dripping with oil when they finish as it seems you suppose) would have penetrated all the way through. But image doesn't why? the blood does, but the image doesn't. as for it matching with scripture, it absolutely does: Mark 15:46 says "Joseph bought a linen cloth, and taking him down, wrapped him in the linen Shroud and laid him in a tomb" the word for linen cloth is Sindona which is in the singular form, meaning it was ONE cloth that the wrapped him in. Matthew 27:59 the word is Sindoni, but that is also a singular form Luke 23:53 uses the same word. John is the only variant and uses the word "Othoniois" which simply "Strips of linen cloth for swathing the dead" so if we take the scriptures seriously, then we know this is not contradictory, but more descriptive of how they would have buried people, meaning upon wrapping Jesus in the Larger shroud and tied it with linen strips. Because John says "they took the body of Jesus and bound it in linen cloths" (john 19:40) that doesn't contradict Matt, Mark, and Luke, it just shows the the Shroud wasn't loosely laid on top of him, but tightly wrapped. none what you presented debunks the Shroud at all. You say the shroud discredits scripture, but the fact that it so closely matches scripture is one of the primary reasons I'm convinced of it's authenticity

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

Lila Rose Podcast on Scientific Evidence on the Shroud of Turin

[@wipo3654]

​​​​​​​​​@@TheRockofGod21 You didn't get the point and you cannot understand some simple gospel verses: "Jesus was wrapped/bound WITH the spices." Explain please how this was done having something like the Shroud. Or do you think that Nicodemus was a fool because he organised 32 kg spices? He was a leading Rabbi of Israel. And Jesus died around 3 pm. Sabbath started around 6 pm. Enough time to take the body from the cross, wrap it and transport it to the nearby rock-tomb. SINDON = a linen cloth? In the original Greek texts of Matthew, Mark and Luke there is no indefinite article "a". Mark 15:46 ESV "And Joseph bought a linen shroud" (in Greek there are just 3 words) 2532 [e] Kai Καὶ And Conj 59 [e] agorasas ἀγοράσας having bought V-APA-NMS 4616 [e] sindona σινδόνα linen cloth N-AFS Watch please my video presentation and we can go on with discussion. And all the following UNBIBLICAL arguments I already know. It is pure wishful thinking: The only correct translation of SINDON is "A linen shroud/sheet/cloth". The head cloth was added on the cross and removed/folded by somebody in the rock-tomb. The removal of the head cloth was either a burial custom of Jews or an instruction of an angel in the rock-tomb. The spices were never or partly added due to lack of time. Jars of spices were brought into the tomb but never used on the body due to fast-approaching Sabbath. The spices maybe were added as packages. The final wrapping was done in the rock-tomb. The women wanted to finish the "burial spicing" after Sabbath because "anointing" means the same. The Shroud is the "sign of Jonah". The body was either in vertical position (lifted up), or gravity has been altered before the image creation by an unknown radiation/flash. The image of the Shroud is the reason why Peter and John "saw and believed" the resurrection. The Shroud/Image was no longer mentioned after resurrection to protect it as a gift for the 20th and 21st century. Paul referred to the Shroud in Galatians 3,1 when writing "Jesus was portrayed as crucified"

[@amaizenblue44]

You realize the carbon dating "blunder" such that it is, directly affect the validity of this report, too, right? The fire is a MUCH bigger deal for this process, and the sample was taken from the same place as the carbon dating sample, which goes against the patch repair theory.

[@ianb483]

Why are people getting so bent out of shape about the AI image and voice? It's a little unusual, but surely the actual content of what was said is what matters here.

[@jendoe9436]

Apparently AI is too “soulless” for comfort and will eventually replace all human creativity 🙄that and some believe demons will use AI to create blasphemous content 😂 Also seen arguments that claim using it for religious imagery is an a-front to the sacred and will promote the continued downfall of humanity. Honestly, it’s still a weird thing and the artwork is too uncanny valley. But I totally expect those issues to be smoothed over within the next decade and we probably won’t know right away what’s done purely by human work and what is created by AI.

[@johnbrion4565]

Great video especially the summary at the end!

[@SamHollidayV]

I like AI stuff (as one might guess from the visuals on my channel) if you don’t, good for you. But no need to berate others that don’t mind it, or like it. Sheesh. Great video, as always Cam

[@jp-too]

In the court of law, the Shroud is easily deemed as the Shroud of Jesus.

[@James-g3w7w]

@@jp-too Did you know that under the rules of evidence in US law you can actually present the shroud IF the evidence is germaine to claim you are making? There's actually a book written by Simon Greenleaf of the Harvard school of law, and I think John Warwick Montgomery has written on this too, it's called THE TESTIMONY OF THE EVANGELISTS.

[@Dr88Black]

Really? How. What evidence ties the cloth to your jesus character?

[@christian78478]

@@Dr88Black I will answer. Shroud of Turin ______________________________________ the so-called The Shroud of Turin is a human-sized canvas preserved in the Roman Catholic Church, in Turin, Italy, which depicts faint front and back views of a crucified, scourged, and tortured man. Shroud is the most studied artifact in the world. Hundreds of scientific publications have been written about it and dozens of books by scientists have been published. Traditionally, the world church has always believed that this is the same Shroud, which, as mentioned in the Gospel, was used in the burial of the Lord Jesus. The church claims that the canvas depicts the tortured body of Jesus, which was reflected on the canvas at the moment of resurrection. Until 1988, the religious community of the Shroud did not doubt its religious origin, and skeptics did not have tangible evidence of the Shroud's inauthenticity until this year. Years 1260-1390 95% accuracy. So, we have two mutually exclusive hypotheses: 1. The Shroud of Turin is the burial cloth of the crucified, crucified and suffering Jesus Christ, on which his image was transferred during the resurrection of Jesus. 2. The Shroud of Turin is a work done by a medieval artist. Let's use logical tools (abductor logic) to try to find the most rational explanation for the emergence of the image reflected on Shroud. It should be noted that the results of the carbon-14 testing were spread by the mass media with amazing zeal and speed, and the story of the inauthenticity of the legendary Turin Shroud spread around the world. The atheist community rejoiced. The community of believers seemed to be in a state of shock. Let's write down the facts: ● There is a painting in Hungary depicting the scene of the burial of Jesus Christ with Shroud, dated 1195 (70-200 years earlier than the carbon-14 test results for Shroud). This painting shows components that are only found on the Shroud of Turin, namely: (1) Jesus is depicted naked in the painting, as well as in the Shroud (nowhere else, in any work of art, is Jesus naked for obvious reasons); (2) the hands are crossed in the same way on the painting preserved in Hungary as on the Shroud of Turin; (3) on the painting preserved in Hungary, just like on the Shroud of Turin, only four fingers of the hand are drawn (the thumb is not visible); (4) the underside of the painting preserved in Ungetsh shows a rare mosaic-style weaving image unique to the Shroud style of weaving; Why should someone depict the manner of knitting in a painting? Moreover, the weaving style characteristic of the Turin Shroud? (5) The drawing clearly shows the burn holes characteristic only of the Turin Shroud in the exact places and in the exact order as on the Turin Shroud. There is no load on these fire-damaged places! how did it happen (See John C. Iannone, The Mystery of the Shroud of Turin: New Scientific Evidence (Staten Island, NY: Alba House, 1998), 154‐155; Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000), 24, 115‐116, 152.) Why is there a trace of the presence of the Shroud on the 12th century painting, which was not created at that time? Was the prophet an artist? Is it reasonable to assume that the painting preserved in Hungary in 1195 was redrawn by the so-called From the depiction of the Shroud of Turin? Is it not rational to assume that the probability of such coincidences is unrealistic? Is it reasonable to think that inaccuracy has crept into the carbon test? ● Before the carbon study was carried out, Turin Shroud expert and archaeology professor William Meacham wrote the following: "I see a completely unhealthy and dogmatic consensus forming about the carbon-14 test, as if this particular carbon test would once and for all establish the age of the Shroud. This attitude is contrary to geologists and archaeologists. views, because the probability of contamination on such artifacts is very high, because we know for sure that the pilgrims touched it with their hands and not only with their hands" (see: Radiocarbon Measurement and the Age of the Turin Shroud: Possibilities and Uncertainties - by William Meacham - Archaeologist; From the Proceedings of the Symposium "Turin Shroud - Image of Christ?" Hong Kong March 1986) ● In general, carbon-14 tests are often characterized by unstable results. For example, the sink test of a live snail showed us 26,000 years, and the test of a freshly killed sea lion showed an age of 1,300 years. I will not continue with the many other mistakes that are common and familiar to professionals. By establishing these facts, I am only trying to say that dogmatic attitude towards carbon-14 testing is completely unprofessional. (See: Mark Antonacci, The Resurrection of the Shroud (New York: M. Evans and Company, Inc., 2000), 157) ● For the 1988 testing, the test sample was taken from the upper high corner (and all three laboratories tested from this sample). This is the corner that was most likely to be contaminated, as it was naturally touched by the hand when folding the canvas in the middle. They also touched it with their hands when the clerics spread it at different times and presented it to the pilgrims. Such a thing happened at least several hundred times throughout history (see: The TurinShroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000), 100) ● In 1982, another unauthorized carbon study was conducted at the University of California. As a result, one part of the sample showed AD. 200 years. And the second part AD. 1000 years (see: Remi Van Haelst, "Radiocarbon Dating the Shroud of Turin - The Nature Report) which was explained by the high rate of contamination. ● In preparation for the radiocarbon testing of the Turin Shroud, the British Museum set aside three test samples to verify the accuracy of the new testing technology used in testing the Turin Shroud. As a result, 41% of test results (between 7 and 17 tests) were found to have significant inaccuracies. The error was 50% or more. In two cases, the delay was neither more nor less than 1000 years. Based on the above, the report written by the British Museum was quite critical of the new carbon method used to test the Shroud (see: Mark Antonacci, Test the Shroud (n.p.: Forefront Publishing Co.: 2015), 298-299) ● Before the testing, at the last minute, the decision was changed and it was decided to conduct the testing in three laboratories instead of seven. All laboratories protested this fact with a petition (including the newly selected laboratories). The petition reads: "We would be an irresponsible organization if we did not state loudly that such a fundamental change in testing methodology could become a prerequisite for error" (see: Mark Antonacci, The Resurrection of the Shroud (New York: M. Evans and Company, Inc., 2000) , 178-179) ● A leading carbon-14 expert expressed deep skepticism about the new carbon testing method before the test (see: J. Raloff, “Controversy Builds as Shroud Tests Near,” Science News, 133) ● At an international symposium in Paris a year after the 1988 carbon testing, almost all scientists working on the Shroud unanimously expressed their distrust of the 1988 carbon testing due to methodological irregularities (see: Shroud Dating Still Questioned - MATEC Web of Conferences) ● The methodology provided for taking samples from three different places in Shroud, and as happened in the case of reducing the number of laboratories, here too, at the last minute, instead of three, a test sample was taken from one place and then cut into three parts, but it should have been the other way around. ● The upper corner from which the test was taken is most likely reconstructed, as the manner of weaving is radically different from the rest of the weaving, as confirmed by weaving experts (see: Evidence for the Skewing of The C-14 Dating of the Shroud of Turin Die to Repairs) . ● Professor Raymond Rogers, an agnostic chemist from the legendary Shroud of Turin research group, compared the test sample with the other fabrics of the Shroud and found that only the test sample contained cotton fabric, while the other parts of the Shroud of Turin did not contain cotton fabric. He noted: "The sample taken from this part of the Shroud is invalid for carbon testing, as it clearly shows traces of textile reconstruction and painting typical of the Middle Ages." (214) (see Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of Turin - Raymond N. Rogers - Collegamento pro Sindone) ● In 2015, a scientific conference was held at the University of Padua, where the new results of the Turin Shroud age testing were announced. Five more universities participated in the test (Bologna, Moderna, Parma, Udine and the Polytechnic University of Bari) (see: Introductory Paper: Scientific Results on the Turin Shroud Coming from a Paduan University Research Project). The following statement was made about the results: "After significant doubt was cast on the reliability of the 1988 carbon-14 testing (due to suspected contamination), tests of alternative, chemical and mechanical methodologies to date the canvas were conducted and it was determined that the so-called The age of the Shroud of Turin largely coincides with the period of Jesus Christ's life in Palestine" (see: Giulio Fanti and Pierandrea Malfi, The Shroud of Turin: First Century After Christ!)

[@christian78478]

● In 2022, another study was conducted to determine the age of Shroud, according to which his age was determined to be 2000 years. In 2022, Italian researchers used a new X-ray technique and found that the Shroud of Turin dates back to the time of Jesus Christ - AD. by the first century. Scientists at the Institute of Crystallography of the National Research Council (Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, CNR) studied eight tiny tissue samples from Shroud using a method called wide-angle X-ray scattering (aka WAXS). They were able to age the cellulose of flax - long chains of sugar molecules that slowly break down over time - to show that the Shroud is 2,000 years old, based on the conditions in which it was stored. They concluded that the Shroud was stored at 22.5 degrees Celsius and 55 percent relative humidity for the first 13 centuries before it was brought to Chambery, France in the 1350s; Had it been stored at a different temperature and relative humidity, the aging of flax cellulose and the resulting dating would have been different. "The data profiles were fully consistent with similar measurements obtained on a linen sample dated by historical records to AD 55-74 found in Masada, Israel," according to the study in the journal Heritage. Samples were also compared to similar linens from the 13th and 14th centuries, but none matched. Dr. Liberato de Caro, one of the scientists involved in the study, rejected a 1988 test that concluded the shroud was likely a medieval forgery and only seven centuries old. This was an inaccurate conclusion. He added: “Unless the sample cleaning procedure is done thoroughly, carbon-14 dating is not reliable. We seem to have had such a case in 1988, which was confirmed by experimental evidence showing that as you move from the periphery to the center of the piece, along the longest side, there is a significant increase in carbon-14. The 2022 study also notes: "If the current result was consistent with the 1988 radiocarbon test results, then the Shroud of Turin would have had to have been stored during its seven centuries of existence at secular room temperatures very close to the maximum values ​​recorded on Earth" (that is, if the Shroud of Turin was indeed only 7 centuries, then such a result that it is 2000 years old, the X-ray study would show only in the event that Shroud was stored for 7 centuries in the Sahara desert or somewhere in the hottest countries of North Africa, which in fact we know it was not and it was stored in Europe. (see: X-ray Dating of a Turin Shroud's linen Sample - MDPI) ● Renowned criminologist and botanist and plant pollination expert, Professor Max Frey, studied the natural pollination particles on Shroud. This type of research allows us to follow with high precision all the locations where Shroud "traveled" over the centuries. Professor Frey found traces of pollination of 58 different plant species. As expected, we have traces of the plant in the fauna of France and Italy (Shroud was kept in France in the Middle Ages). However, to many people's surprise, 45 out of 58 (78%) plant species have traces of pollination beyond Europe! It was found on Shroud from the fauna of Turkey, namely from the area of ​​the city of Uefa (ancient Edessa, where legend tells us that the hand-made image of Jesus was kept). ● The most important discovery is that 72% of all plant pollination points to the same location - Jerusalem and its surroundings! (See: W. Bulst, “The Pollen Grains on the Shroud of Turin,” Shroud Spectrum International 10 (March, 1984)) I would like to draw your attention to the pollen of one of the plants - Gundelia Tournefortii. This is a rare plant whose flower looks quite depressing because it has long, sharp and pointed tendrils. (See Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000), 90) Professor Uri Baruch, who is a palynologist (the branch of plant pollination) and a well-known specialist in Jewish flora (he defended his doctorate on the flora of Israel) reveals to us: Gundelia tournefort is extremely rare not only in other geographical areas, but even in Israel (see Avinoam Danin (citing Dr. Uri Baruch, palynologist with Israel Antiquities Authority), "The Origin of the Shroud of Turin from the Near East as Evidenced By Plant Images and By Pollen Grains.) Nevertheless, pollen of this plant was found among them on the Shroud of Turin! It is important to note that the transfer of pollen of this plant from one place to another is carried out only by insects and not by wind. Therefore, we can assume that the famous crown that was placed on the head of Jesus was spun from this plant because dust particles of this plant were found in the vicinity of the image of Shroud. (See: Avinoam Danin, "The Origin of the Shroud of Turin from the Near East as Evidenced By Plant Images and By Pollen Grains," - Shroud of Turin Website; XVI International Botanical Congress. ʺBotanical Evidence Indicates ʺShroud Of Turinʺ Originated In Jerusalem Area Before 8th Century.ʺ ScienceDaily, 3 August) ● In addition, we have independent evidence that Gundelia tournefort is the very plant that was placed on the head of Jesus as a crown. As you know, we know from the Gospels that there was another veil that was covered over the face of Jesus after his death, later this veil was removed from the face of the buried Jesus (John 20:7). Fortunately, this canvas still exists today and is preserved in Spain, namely in the city of Oviedo. (See: Mark Antonacci, Test the Shroud (n.p.: Forefront Publishing Co.: 2015), 358‐359.) Naturally, there is no image on it, because it did not cover Jesus when he rose from the dead, although there are traces of blood on it! (see: Mark Guscin, "The Sudarium of Oviedo: Its History and Relationship to the Shroud of Turin, Shroud of Turin Website) The striking coincidences on the Shroud and the face cloth prove that both were applied to the same human body. Let's see what coincidences we are talking about: 1. Amazingly, Gundelia Tournefort pollen was found on both the Shroud and face cloth. 2. Blood types (AB) match each other. The chance of this coincidence is 1/1000 (see Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000), 76-79). 3. Professor Alan Wangler conducted the so-called Polarized image coincidence analysis, which revealed the number of coincidences between Sudara and Shroud blood locations (see: Mark Guscin, “The Sudarium of Oviedo: Its History and Relationship to the Shroud of Turin,” - Shroud of Turin Website)

[@christian78478]

4. Researchers from the University of Oviedo and the Spanish Center of Sindocógio conducted an X-ray study that revealed traces of the exact type of mud contamination on the face cloth and in the exact location (nose) where the same mud composition was also found on the Turin Shroud. The composition of the mud also matches the geological composition near Calvary. Scholars suggest that Jesus was dragged on the horizontal part of the cross on Golgotha ​​and he fell on his face and injured his nose (this is clearly visible in the image of the Shroud). It was from the nose that the dispersion of the same mud composition took place on both the Shroud and the face cloth. ● Despite the fact that the Shroud of Turin is the most studied artifact in the world, even in the 21st century it is not possible to create an approximate copy of it. To the natural eye, the human image on Shroud is blurred. It wasn't until 1898 that anyone saw what we were able to see after photographer Secondo Pia took the first photograph of Shroud. The most interesting thing happened next: as Shroud historian Ian Wilson tells us: "When Secondo Pia revealed his negative he was in a state of shock. Instead of a hard-to-read negative (as is usually the case), he had a sharp image positive in his hand. It defied physics. It was a miracle." . (See: Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000); Children of the digital world may have a hard time understanding the photographer's shock because we no longer expose tapes today. Digital progress has left this technology in the past. Therefore, let's briefly explain: after taking a picture, the so-called image of the picture is recorded on the tape. negative. If we look at this negative, the resolution of the image is blurry. In the exposure room, the said negative is returned to the positive and the image is captured on the photograph. In the case of Sudar, the opposite happened and is happening. what does that mean This means that the image of Sudar is already in the negative. Taking the picture made him positive, so to speak. It was as if someone from within took a picture of this man's image and it was transferred to the canvas like a tape and turned into a revealing tape. how did this happen Did we invent photography only at the beginning of the 19th century? How did someone manage to create a photo negative on canvas? And why didn't the introduction of this technology continue? Why can't we replicate it in the 21st century? Suppose someone managed to create a photo effect in the Middle Ages, how did they monitor the image? The creator of the image should have had a positive with him?! It should be noted that archaeologists have found a considerable number of burial cloths and there is no image on any of them. ● No work of art in history has been protected with such accuracy. On the Shroud of Turin, details of fantastic physiological and anatomical accuracy are preserved, even with photo effects. how No one knows! (See: John H. Heller, Report on the Shroud of Turin (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983). ● The results of the suffering of the man depicted on the Shroud fully match the details of the martyrdom of Jesus Christ in the Gospels, including the after-death effects, such as bleeding during the suffering. As we mentioned above, the blood on Shroud is human and it was found to be AB group (IV group). Only 3% of the world's population has blood from this group, and for some reason Jews are the exception (19%) (see Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000). ● The image of the man depicted on the Shroud has a Jewish appearance and his hair is tied in the same manner as the Jews of the first century. (See: Mark Antonacci, The Resurrection of the Shroud (New York: M. Evans and Company, Inc., 2000). ● The scientists microscopically examined the incisions in the image and found that each incision has a detailed depressed center with raised peripheries that are only visible under a microscope. How someone with a microscope managed to give all the cuts such a shape remains a mystery. The scientists took a picture of the blood sections, exposed them to ultraviolet light, and found traces of blood clots characteristic of previously invisible sections. (See Miller and S. F. Pellicori, “Ultraviolet Fluorescent Photography,” Shroud Spectrum International) These two details are invisible to the naked eye and it is impossible to control its forgery. ● Sandia laboratory physicists, professors John Jackson and Bill Motern, decided to use the Sudar image as the so-called Tested with VP-8 analyzer. The surface of the planets of the solar system is studied with the VP-8 analyzer. This instrument can provide a three-dimensional picture of the planet's surface because it measures the difference between the elevations and depressions and thus produces a 3-D image. Ordinary photographs when passed through the VP-8 analyzer do not give any effect, and when the image of Shroud was studied with this device, the scientists were amazed. The image of Shroud gave us a natural three-dimensional image. (See: Ian Wilson and Barry Schwortz, The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence (New York: Barnes and Noble, Inc., 2000), 36) How is it possible for a two-dimensional (flat) image to store three-dimensional information? The physicist recalls: "This result has never been observed in any other image that we have ever studied, nor have I ever heard of this effect being produced on any type of image. Only the image of the Crucified Man on the Shroud of Turin was able to do this." (See: Peter M. Schumacher, “PhotogrammetricResponses From The Shroud of Turin,” 1999) Professor Schumacher adds: "It is puzzling how a medieval artist was able to create a three-dimensional photographic effect. It is impossible for him to have known that he was creating this effect, because there was no way to verify it. Also, why do we not have other such artefacts preserved? Why did the artist create only one such copy and why was the technology of this art lost?" "There is no other image like this in the world." (See: Peter M. Schumacher, “PhotogrammetricResponses From The Shroud of Turin,” 1999) It should be noted that the three-dimensional effect is provided by both front and back images. In 2006, Prof. Petrus Sunamo and Bernardo Germarini, in collaboration with the Dutch Holographic Laboratory, managed to create a 3-D hologram of the image of the Shroud. (See: Conversion 2D to 3D - Shroud Of Turin Holograms - shroudhologram.com)

[@s.mathew3375]

*🙏🏻our Lord and Saviour*

[@Dr88Black]

No. It's your fantasy friend.

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

Rebecca Watson, Lawrence Krauss and Neil Tyson degrasse DEBUNKED! Nice work, Cameron!! Keep on with this videos about shroud!

[@malirk]

How are they debunked? Did Turin finally let people test it who are skeptics?

[@trentitybrehm5105]

These next passages are about the Holy Spirit being a separate person from the Father and the Son, and also being God. Matthew 3:16-17 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembra nce all thing s that I said to you. John 15:26-27 But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning. John 16:13-15 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. 2 Samuel 23:2-3 (David calling the Spirit God) “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue. 3 The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spoke to me: ‘He who rules over men must be just, Ruling in the fear of God. Acts 5:3-4 (Peter calling the Spirit God) But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remai ned, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

[@tobias4411]

They are not debunked lol. Did you know that not only atheists, but also Christians rejects the Shroud? Statues don't cry, Jesus don't appear on toasted bread or textiles 😂.

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

They never worked on it

[@malirk]

@@TheresaCronin-kc6wz Give Neil deGrasse Tyson access to the cloth and watch it get debunked. Oh wait, Turin doesn't let skeptics work on it.

[@laramatthews2082]

Remains unduplicatable even with today's modern technology.

[@tobias4411]

And therefore God?

[@laramatthews2082]

@@tobias4411 spark of life

[@raygiordano1045]

@@tobias4411 Yes, thanks for asking.

[@topcatcoolio8807]

@@laramatthews2082 God in the Flesh. Come to save us !

[@tobias4411]

@@raygiordano1045 The image has three-dimensional qualities and behaves like a photographic negative, which are features not seen in other artworks from that period. Does this show it must be a miracle? No, it could be some unknown or lost techniques. The negative image could have been formed using techniques similar to photography, possibly involving light-sensitive chemicals or radiation. One hypothesis is that the image was formed through a dehydrative oxidation process, which discolored the fibers without the use of any coloring agent that would be affected by heat. Or some chemical etching with acidic compounds. It has also been speculated that Leonardo da Vinci might have used pioneering techniques to create the Shroud. Who knows? Until recently, modern science didn't know how the Romans made their concrete. Does this imply that it was considered a miraculous achievement until just a few years ago? 'Not knowing' does not equate to 'miraculous.'

[@alanniketic7690]

The shroud doesn't matter. Jesus does. He is Lord and only true God and Saviour.

[@tobias4411]

Apparently it matters to many people around the world. Just as crying statues and images of Jesus on toasted bread do. What a mess.

[@beverlyhurd8556]

Just knowing that it's really the burial shroud of our Lord Jesus gives me, and I'm sure millions of others, great comfort.

[@tobias4411]

@@beverlyhurd8556 Of course, a piece of cloth is the best proof of divinity. Who needs faith when you have fabric?

[@beverlyhurd8556]

@@tobias4411 Funny. About as intelligent a response as I would ever expect from a typical atheist. What does an atheist know about faith? Unless they have faith that they are going to Hell. Which, of course they all are. Fine by me.

[@les2997]

If the shroud were fake, we would likely know how it was made.

[@gluckmac]

Ha!

[@calebcrawford2520]

Exactly. With the technology we have today, we would've been able to reproduce it, especially if it was made in the Middle Ages.

[@FishermensCorner]

that's some serious broken logic

[@calebcrawford2520]

@@FishermensCorner if you could explain how it’s broken logic, we would appreciate it.

[@FishermensCorner]

@@calebcrawford2520 no, that's not how this works. Oh we know the pyramids are real but we still don't know how it works. We can predict gravity, but we still have no idea how that works... just because we don't know how somebody accomplished something doesn't mean it's authentic or real... like that is such ridiculous logic it makes me hope you people are very young

[@kinghoodofmousekind2906]

Thank you for the interview. I just found the AI voice with the thick accent a bit 'off-putting' (native Italian here, btw), but it's just a nitpicky note.

[@daMillenialTrucker]

I legit cannot understand all the words the AI is saying 😂

[@kinghoodofmousekind2906]

@@daMillenialTrucker I can, but...I must admit; I feel attacked on an almost personal level :P Cameron's heart was in the right place, but I would have preferred a real person reading Dr De Caro's email replies. I still admire that he interviewed a non-English speaker and that the Doctor took his time to translate his answers and mail them back to him.

[@colonalklink14]

I personally believe that the shroud of Turin is legitimate as the burial cloth of Christ. At any rate in order to have everlasting life you absolutely must trust in the person and finished work of Christ alone for salvation 💗 this means that saving repentance is turning from unbelief to belief. You either believe that Jesus paid your sin debt in full or you don't.

[@Christianityisamyth]

If it's then it's suppose to heal the sick remember there was on lady who just touched Jesus clothing and she was healed

[@AquinasBased]

@@Christianityisamyth "it was your faith that healed you"

[@Christianityisamyth]

​@@AquinasBasedso then believers who touched the shroud should be healed of any sickness then.

[@borneandayak6725]

I believe it authentic

[@Dr88Black]

I think to be a good human you should believe in things that are real and not encourage others to devote their lives to mythology. It would be different if you you could demonstrate your claims. Go ahead.

[@johnnyboy6707]

I always thought carbon dating would be highly problematic on fabric that was in circulation for centuries. If stored or buried at around the time of its creation, and left undisturbed till it was rediscovered in the modern era..then maybe I could see carbon dating being more accurate on fabric. The Sudarium was dated to around 700, but it definitely goes back to at least the mid 6th century via the known history of it. The laboratory which conducted the dating admitted that contamination was likely to blame for the discrepancy.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

Actually, the Shrouds' linen is an excellent candidate for radiocarbon testing because it has been carefully preserved and has never been buried in dirt. Rucker believes that the Shroud's radiocarbon data must be accepted as valid for the location tested. As for the Sudarium, please remember that it was in the tomb somewhere near the Shroud. It has been carbon dated three times, all resulting in 8th century. The Titulus Crusis also shows a severely skewed radiocarbon date. See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020.

[@SonnyWane]

Man put a thick accent on the AI voice over and thought we wouldn’t know the difference… 💀

[@johnh383]

"The results of radiocarbon measurements at Arizona, Oxford and Zurich yield a calibrated calendar age range with at least 95 percent confidence for the linen of the Shroud of Turin of [CE] 1260-1390," a paper on the tests published in Nature concludes. "These results therefore provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is medieval." This dates it roughly to around the time it appeared in historical records, near to the time when the bishop of Troyes declared it to be a cunning fraud. It has since been suggested, by those who likely want to believe in its authenticity, that the teams could have taken a sample from an area of the shroud which was repaired in the 12-1300s, or that the shroud was contaminated during a fire in Chambery, France, in 1532. Clutching even more desperately at straws, others have suggested that the shroud became contaminated by carbon monoxide, throwing off the dating of the cloth by a thousand or so years. Subjecting other cloths to carbon monoxide as a test, however, has not shown any significant impact on radiocarbon dating.

[@tobias4411]

Yes, the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud involved several rigorous protocols to ensure accuracy and objectivity; 1.Inter-laboratory comparison Three independent labs to minimize bias and cross-verify results by comparing findings from different teams. 2. Blind testing The laboratories were blind to the origins of the samples to prevent any preconceived notions or biases from affecting the results. 3. Sample Preparation Strict sample preparation methods were employed to remove contaminants and ensure that the samples used for dating were as clean as possible. 4. Use of advanced technology The laboratories used the best available instruments at the time for radiocarbon dating, ensuring high precision in the measurements. (Ref: See paper "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin" from ScienceDirect).

[@beverlyhurd8556]

If you actually are so _incredibly stupid_ as to believe the Shroud is a fake, then you must explain how whoever fabricated it must have: 1. Known the precise methods of crucifixion in the first century. 2. Be proficient enough in over 100 scientific disciplines and also collectively outweigh the intelligence of the people who performed hundreds and hundreds of tests on the Shroud and who are not finding any indications of a forgery. 3. Possessed the medical knowledge of a modern expert surgeon. 4. Utilized an art process unknown to any great master, never duplicated before or since. 5. Be able to foresee and approximate principles of photographic negativity that would not be discovered for centuries. 6. Imported a piece of old cloth of Middle Eastern manufacture. 7. Used a coloring agent which would be unaffected by intense heat. 8. Be able to incorporate in his work details (that have only recently been discovered), that the human eye cannot see and that are visible only with the most advanced computer-scanning devices. 9. Be able to reproduce flawlessly, on a nearly flat linen surface, in a single color, undistorted 3-D characteristics of a human body in a 'negative format' on the tops of the threads, while conversely showing the 'blood' as positive and soaking all the way through. 10. Get somewhere the blood of a tortured man and apply it before creating the image. 11. Get limestone from Jerusalem, and pollen particles from the middle east, in special from plants with thorns, that flourish only between March and April.

[@nedh.8792]

That 95% confidence level has been retracted by the same publication that originally published the radiocarbon dating results, in response to challenges by Tristan Casabianca. Furthermore, Bishop d'Arcis memorandum has been completely discredited, most recently in The Hidden History of the Shroud of Turin by Jack Markwardt, pp 209-239. The only way to resolve this matter is to conduct additional tests, including radiocarbon dating and wide angle x-ray's on other threads from the Shroud.

[@elainelksuabernet]

This is the mercy of God calling everyone in to turn to him and Repent. Is the only way you can endure what is coming. Humility enable you to help see the grace of God

[@amandasmith9737]

This is incredible!!!

[@trentitybrehm5105]

These next passages are about the Holy Spirit being a separate person from the Father and the Son, and also being God. Matthew 3:16-17 When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17 And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and b ring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 15:26-27 But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proce eds from the Father, He will testify of Me. 27 And you also will bear witness, because you have been with Me from the beginning. John 16:13-15 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. 2 Samuel 23:2-3 (David calling the Spirit God) “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, And His word was on my tongue. 3 The God of Israel said, The Rock of Israel spo ke to me: ‘He who rules over men must be just, Ruling in the fear of God. Acts 5:3-4 (Peter calling the Spirit God) But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price of the land for yourself? 4 While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God."

[@tionarry]

Seems many people in your comment section an idiot, Cameron. Bunch of adults complaining about AI-generated image🤦. It's okay if you don't like it but dismissing everything because of an AI? Some are asking, "How do we know he actually interviewed him?" I forgot that Dr. De Caro lives in Earth 2, which can only be reached once every 10 years through a magical portal! 🤦🤦 I'm not even a fan of the shroud. To be frank, a part of me doesn't want it to be real. Bias maybe. But.....

[@mcba6811]

Cameron, please reply to the Falk response to your response. I think he has a lot of good points, even if I believe he could be more gracious in his presentation. Perhaps have him on your show.

[@olivieryeung398]

Could you please find the line of custody of this artifacts?

[@jamiejaegel7962]

Wait till Cameron looks up the house of Loreto🤫

[@dr.tafazzi]

It might be the true house, but since the 1920s we've known that there has been a funny situation reguarding the moving of the house from Palestine to Loreto. It was apparently done by the noble family "Angeli", which means angels in latin and italian... I'll let you fill in the rest.

[@angelbrother1238]

Maybe Trent horn will finally do some real research into the shroud before making an assertion that he believes that it’s a forgery

[@colonalklink14]

His faith is a forgery. Faith plus works equals salvation heretic backloading double talking fruit inspecting devil.

[@DarrenGedye]

wide angle x-ray scattering isn't "cutting edge" as you claim. It hasn't even made it to "bleeding edge". It seems to be still firmly in the "unsubstantiated" zone. It might turn out to be usable, or it might not. But lets not get carried away until it has been properly tested and verified.

[@sigurdholbarki8268]

You can always read the paper and methodology yourself, or you can wait for other people you don't know and have never met to substantiate it for you

[@DarrenGedye]

@@sigurdholbarki8268 I'm an Analytical Chemist by training, and I worked on developing a new method of testing ceramic pipes for durability. I had more samples in my first trial step then this has in its final publication. I haven't done any single crystal work but I've done plenty of powder X-ray diffraction so I do understand the basics. They started with the *Shroud of Turin* for crying out loud, and there wasn't any blind testing or independent replication. I'm a Christian and I don't really care if the Shroud is genuine or not as it makes no difference to my faith, but this is terrible science. Would you be supporting it if it *didn't* seem to support your opinion of the Shroud?

[@tobias4411]

​@@sigurdholbarki8268The WAXS (Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering) testing was created by "Shroudie" researchers.😂. Furthermore, this method is unverified, untested and still experimental. It was specifically devised for analyzing the Shroud and has yet to be reviewed or endorsed by the broader academic community as a standard method for dating ancient textiles.

[@Jenigami]

what is the dimension of the shroud btw..and what is the usual sizes they used before to wrap a dead body..

[@nedh.8792]

3 feet 7 inches x 13 feet 7 inches. Or very close to those dimensions.

[@Jenigami]

@@nedh.8792 that was just enough to do that drawing.

[@PierreRoustan]

Don't mind the audio and AI, bravo.

[@nancyjernigan5840]

John 20 makes it clear the head cloth WAS SEPARATE!

[@bryonstevenson1084]

How did you know it didn't get destroyed or lost. 2 explain that image.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

@@bryonstevenson1084 It is now in Oviedo, Spain and called the Sudarium. No one has been able to explain the image despite intensive examination with modern scientific instruments. That is why we think that it is miraculous. The images of that crucified corpse should not be there, but anyone can see them..

[@theautodidacticlayman]

🤔

[@dr.tafazzi]

what if the head was first wrapped in the head cloth, and then the whole body was wrapped in the shroud? Would that contradict John's Gospel? No. We know Jesus' body was not prepared by professionals...

[@danielbrowniel]

" And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, 7 and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself." The point that the cloth was folded was a message that a master would make during supper. If the master folds the cloth, it means he is not done (He will be back) John 20 doesnt specify that the head cloth was the only cloth touching Christ's head, that would be your own assumption.

[@LetteringTheLord]

Haha yes. Christianity is true! ❤

[@tobias4411]

Eh, no.

[@LetteringTheLord]

@@tobias4411 I’ll pray that you find Jesus Tobias

[@tobias4411]

@@LetteringTheLord Thank you. I'm always happy to be prayed for, infact the more prayers the better. As the more of you that pray for me, and no god shows himself or causes a supernatural event, the more reinforced my knowledge is that your god is a work of fiction.

[@SupremeSkeptic]

Dr. Liberato is a very skilled ventriloquist.

[@kraftmorrison]

When will Rebecca Watson respond to this video? Never? hahaha

[@_the__void_]

I strongly recommend you watch Dr Falk's reply to Cameron, which shows serious issues with the methodology used by the team that did this research going back to the retracted 2019 study, right up to the current one.

[@danielkirienko1701]

The retracted study was from 2017, I think.

[@_the__void_]

@@danielkirienko1701 Definitely 2019. But check out the Falk video to be sure. It gives a very different perspective to Cameron's from someone that is actually an expert in the field.

[@_the__void_]

@@danielkirienko1701 Actually, I think you're right about the 2017 paper being the one that was retracted. My apologies. The objections remain the same.

[@CapturingChristianity]

@@_the__void_Falk is not an expert in this field.

[@_the__void_]

@@CapturingChristianity Have you watched his response?

[@mikejurney9102]

Were did he get the sample on which they used WAXS? Did they get it from the corner, from the remnants of the sample taken for the C-14 test?

[@daffidavit]

Question: Do the custodians of the three labs who performed the original carbon dating on the Shroud still stand by the date range they determined, now that the raw data has been revealed? Others have criticized the carbon-dated results, but what do those who performed the dating now have to say?

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

There is no reason for the labs to disavow their readings. It is the interpretation of those readings which was done by the scientists at the British Museum that is the issue. See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020.

[@daffidavit]

@@jeffreyerwin3665 Thanks for the citation.

[@tobias4411]

​@@daffidavitMore for you man. The radiocarbon dating of the Shroud involved several rigorous protocols to ensure accuracy and objectivity; 1.Inter-laboratory comparison Three independent labs to minimize bias and cross-verify results by comparing findings from different teams. 2. Blind testing The laboratories were blind to the origins of the samples to prevent any preconceived notions or biases from affecting the results. 3. Sample Preparation Strict sample preparation methods were employed to remove contaminants and ensure that the samples used for dating were as clean as possible. 4. Use of advanced technology The laboratories used the best available instruments at the time for radiocarbon dating, ensuring high precision in the measurements. (Ref: See paper "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the shroud of turin" from ScienceDirect).

[@beverlyhurd8556]

@@tobias4411 Ah! Our favorite atheist living in denial again! What else to expect? The carbon dating was _proven_ to be bogus yet, incredibly, you still defend it? Why am I not surprised? 😂😂

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

@@tobias4411 The radiocarbon readings on the Shroud were correct. There is no reason to doubt them. The question is, "What do these readings signify?" A date? Or a neutron radiation event? Because either hypothesis is consistent with the data. Art history has proven that the Shroud was extant in the sixth century. Therefore, the hypothesis of a 14th century date cannot be correct. Of course, if one employs circular reasoning (the images on the Shroud cannot be proof of a miracle because miracles cannot happen) then one cannot choose the hypothesis of a neutron radiation event either. See: "The Carbon Dating of the Shroud is Explained by Neutron Absorption," Rucker, 2020.

[@rlpsychology]

Very exciting research evidence! Thank you, brother.

[@republiccooper]

Dr. De Caro responded to an email and this is read off by AI, correct?

[@melodygn]

Is him the author of one of the articles (one of them actually retracted) that had a personal revelation in 1998 that confirmed him that the shroud was the real thing?

[@PiotrDrzymkowski]

AI reading might be okay, provided that you show the original text on screen and specifically show that this is read by AI. The generated photo (and thank God just photo, not an animated person) is redundant and confusing, looks very unprofessional, in my opinion. Stick to what is true and honest in your content, don't try to follow trends, it will work better for your videos and your overall to your channel :)

[@dext1352]

Yeah only one particular is, obviusly, missing from all of this. This detail is that the dating to be precise would mean that the shroud should have been preserved in an ambient with 70-55% humidity and a temparure of 20-22.5 C for 13 centuries. I mean, if you really belive that this test or any test that has tried to prove without any success if the shorud is real or not it's your choice, but it's really a bad choice

[@scottstewart2711]

Why does it seem like the Dr is AI?

[@debbiewirt4874]

@scottstewart2711 According to text on the screen at the beginning of his 'answers' shows his image and his voice are both AI. His works (which were published) have not been altered.

[@scottstewart2711]

@@debbiewirt4874 that’s crazy

[@trentitybrehm5105]

IKR. I can't tell if he actually interviewed the guy and just did an AI pic, too what he said and did AI voice and pic, or if he didn't interview him and came up with these questions to frame the video as an interview and used AI voice for what the Doctor has already written before. It's off putting and I don't like it

[@scottstewart2711]

@@trentitybrehm5105 I completely agree.

[@Satarack]

In the comments he explains that he did an email interview, so the AI is reading the email replies he received. Honestly this is confusing people and it's leaving a bad impression that could have been avoided by just showing the emails and reading them himself.

[@jermsil3]

Cameron triggering everyone's uncanny valley.

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

Why are Lawrence Krauss and Neil Tyson Degrasse fans coming here to cry? Don't like the new study on the shroud? Don't worry: science is not synonymous with militant atheism as you think it is.

[@tobias4411]

The "new" study was made two years ago. The WAXS (Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering) testing was created by "Shroudie" researchers.😂. Furthermore, this method is unverified, untested and still experimental. It was specifically devised for analyzing the Shroud and has yet to be reviewed or endorsed by the broader academic community as a standard method for dating ancient textiles. I guess you have to do better research, before posting.

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@tobias4411 The carbon 14 test was done 36 years ago, refuted by Raymond Rogers in 2005, who reanalyzed the sample and detected a mixture of tissues, and the refutation was confirmed by the Oxford laboratory in 2019 in a PEER-REVIEWED RETRACTION published in 2019 (you can easily find it on Google). Regarding the dating method, it was peer-reviewed and accepted by the scientific journal. Who said it wasn't tested experimentally, since the article was peer-reviewed and so far NOBODY has refuted it? It's nice to see your despair because your militant neo-atheism is easily broken by MODERN SCIENCE! LOL

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@tobias4411 The carbon 14 test was done 36 years ago, refuted by Raymond Rogers in 2005, who reanalyzed the sample and detected a mixture of tissues, and the refutation was confirmed by the Oxford laboratory in 2019 in a PEER-REVIEWED RETRACTION published in 2019 (you can easily find it on Google). Regarding the dating method, it was peer-reviewed and accepted by the scientific journal. Who said it wasn't tested experimentally, since the article was peer-reviewed and so far NOBODY has refuted it? It's nice to see your despair because your militant neo-atheism is easily broken by MODERN SCIENCE! LOL

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@tobias4411 Saying that the method is still being analyzed by the scientific community is a famous "APPEAL TO AUTHORITY fallacy: It is only true if most scientists accept it". If that is the case, evolution is also false because not everyone or the majority accepts evolution as it is! And you LIED saying that the method is not verified and tested, even though there are SEVERAL peer-reviewed studies on this dating method (which is not that new). And one more thing: SCIENCE lives on PROGRESS, not on the past! I think you should research more about the PROGRESS of SCIENCE before posting, because it DOES NOT CARE about the MERE OPINIONS of ATHEIST MILITANTS 😘😘

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@tobias4411 😭😭 "academic community" = ONLY scientists who agree with me and support my philosophycal worldview". Famous APPEAL TO AUTHORITY! Cry more, militant new atheist! Cry more! The study HAS ALREADY BEEN PEER REVIEWED and the method is SYNONYMOUS with SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS! Those who live in the past in science live in pseudoscience! Your despair is my amusement, just like all the atheist militants crying with rage! It is DELICIOUS to see you crying with rage! LOL!

[@jonstaley-q5p]

James Paul, the brother of General John Paul, of the Gospels, plays many roles in the New Testament. He is James, the Just; and the Justus of Josephus. His is the name mistranslated " James, the Less." Jakobos Mikros is the Greek so translated. Jacobus Paulus would be the Latin equivalent. As an Englishman he would be plain James Little; for " Little," not " Less," is the correct meaning of " Mikros " and Paulus or Paul. According to Eusebius (H. E. II, 23), he was the brother of Christ Simon Justus - thus General Simon Arshakuni Bar Gi'ora Izates Mono bazus II, John and Paul were brothers. Indeed Tacitus, in his History V, 12, gives the name Bar Gioras to John, thus confirming the anagram - Ben Georas - referred to heretofore. Similarly an alias of Paul's is given in the New Testament as Saulus or Saul, which means " destroyer " - or " slaughterer." The common belief that Paul did not know the Jesus in life is disproven by I Cor. 9: 1, and II Cor. 5 : 16, and also by Acts 20 : 35, where Paul quoted from the Son of Man a saying not found elsewhere : " It is more blessed to give than to receive."

[@Del-Canada]

I don't like the way Dr. De Caro is staring at me.

[@Del-Canada]

Harry Potter in 40 years.

[@tobias4411]

​@@Del-Canada😭

[@WePlugGOODMusic]

Is this engagement farming but the Christian KZbin edition?

[@elainelksuabernet]

Thanks!

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

Cameron plz have Jay Dyer on the show…

[@CapturingChristianity]

I'm open. He's apparently blocked me.

[@johnbrion4565]

Who is Jay Dyer and why would he block Cameron someone who is open minded and a seeker of truth.

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

@@CapturingChristianity Usually it’s the other way around, Roman Catholics blocking him after getting butthurt about him exposing their heretical views.

[@TyrellWellickEcorp]

@@johnbrion4565 Orthodox Christian apologist. Phenomenal debater too.

[@dr.tafazzi]

@@TyrellWellickEcorp being rude and triumphalistic is not "phenomenal debater" material.

[@jsmith108]

I want it to be real, so I find people who agree with that position and focus on that evidence while dismissing the rest

[@tubinho79]

Ŵhat's up with the strange Italian accent?

[@SonnyWane]

AI Image? Obvious AI voice? Maybe AI generated response? What the heck is this?

[@SunbreathingShadow]

What's your reaction to Egyptian archeologist recently?

[@dr.tafazzi]

he posted an in depth point by point response to his criticisms.

[@CapturingChristianity]

I’m happy giving him the last word (doesn’t mean he’s right, obviously).

[@ianb483]

I have a "they're both right" position on this. Falk's criticisms are legitimate but not decisive. The dating is evidence for a 1st century date, but tentative and not especially strong evidence for the reasons he gave. Rather, it just adds somewhat to a cumulative case for the Shroud's authenticity.

[@JohnFinkjfin55]

I invite you to listen a video called: "Unwrapping the Shroud of Turing?. It's an hour video on Yt.

[@LocallyLostHandmade]

Is this Video Created In the name of Jesus or in the name of your Ego/Flesh? Pray about it, and let God use you.

[@davidhudson4230]

Can we please not do AI??

[@silviosposito375]

There is a logical argument - and very easy too - which is never used: why should have make such an extraordinary artist-scientist of medieval times a photographic negative of Jesus, and not a positive one? Why using such a faint and weak image only visible with great difficulty? Obviously we don't know neither his technological knowledges nor his amazing technique!

[@malirk]

Someone could create the Shroud by first starting with a piece of linen cloth, similar to what was used in the Middle Ages. They could coat the cloth with a thin layer of starch or gelatin to make it more receptive to the materials needed for image creation. Next, they could craft a bas-relief sculpture a shallow, 3D depiction of a human figure using materials like clay or metal to represent the face and body of Christ. Once the bas-relief is ready, they could heat it slightly, but not enough to burn the cloth, just enough to leave a faint scorch mark when pressed onto the linen. This would create the initial outline of the figure. After pressing the heated bas-relief onto the cloth to form a faint, negative-like image, they could use a finely ground iron oxide pigment mixed with a binder (such as gelatin or egg white) to enhance specific details like the hair, beard, and facial features. They could lightly dust or rub this mixture onto the raised surfaces of the cloth, especially over areas where the heated bas-relief made contact, giving the impression of shading and depth. This would ensure the image appears as a superficial marking on only the uppermost fibers of the linen, similar to the Shroud. To create the illusion of a photonegative effect, they could apply a weak acid or another chemical reagent to the raised portions of the bas-relief before pressing it onto the cloth. This would chemically react with the linen, causing slight discoloration over time and enhancing the negative image effect. Additionally, to further replicate natural aging, they could expose the cloth to a mild heat source or sunlight over an extended period, allowing environmental conditions to naturally darken the image and age the fabric. Finally, to ensure that the final product looked ancient, they could wash the cloth in a dilute solution of ammonia (urine was commonly used for such purposes in medieval times) to give it an aged, yellowed appearance. This washing, combined with dirt and handling, would contribute to the worn, ancient look of the Shroud, while also softening the pigments and enhancing the faint, mysterious appearance of the image. This blending of heat, chemical reactions, light pigment application, and intentional aging processes would give the Shroud its unique characteristics: a faint, photonegative image with no clear brushstrokes and an appearance of great age.

[@malirk]

Problem is... most skeptics don't have the time, energy or resources to do this. Also if we did it, religious people would still worship the cloth because we didn't get every detail perfect.

[@wet-read]

​@@malirk You mean, do it again? (That is, replicate how whoever made it centuries ago did it) Also, I think I read somewhere that some form of energy released during earthquakes could have altered the physical makeup of the shroud.

[@mkl2237]

A lot of words there Bri that add up to… nonsense. Amazing to see a Philosoher with a love for A-vangelism drone on about a subject that imaging specialists from top labs and universities are mystified by and can NOT duplicate. I am sure they’ll be grateful to you and say “Oh, why didn’t we just ask Bri… he made it sound so easy… You need to actually go deep into the findings. This comment was laughable. You often have great things to say… in your real… argument formation, and the like. On this topic, you’re grasping for straws… in thin air…. And it makes you look desperate. Next time: fewer words… and more sense.

[@mkl2237]

Bri… go for it. DO it. Don’t just yak yak yak yak about it. You’d make a fortune… way better than a crappy salary for philosophy. Seriously. You’re so confident you could do it…. DO it and make some real money… But… uh… how ya gonna get the blood on there? Who’s ya gonna use… and get the real drip patterns and even flagrum sizes and … oh, I digress. Why am I wasting time on such nonsense????? It’s cuz I still love ya Bri. Everyone has lanes. You’re just… WAY out of yours here. You’ll retain your cool look easier if you stick to what you do best…. Atheism evangelism. And Chat-starting This was… just…. Cringe.

[@mkl2237]

See Bri… I do things for a living. I DO real world science. Philosopher evangelists… talk about it. Brother… a lot of spouting off there. Go make a fortune. Go DO it. (Clue: you can’t…)

[@jsmith108]

I think its good you tried something new with AI

[@republiccooper]

This isn't an interview. This was a questionnaire or a digital chat. It's a bit disingenuous to say this is an exclusive interview.

[@bowlineastronomenov5507]

Whats the point of using AI?

[@Nethertar]

This is great and I get it, but the AI thing is kinda goofy.

[@ChicagoRican]

What about AB blood on the shroud matching the blood of Eucharistic miracles? Can you dive deeper into that?

[@tobias4411]

Red ochre (iron oxide) and vermilion (mercury sulfide) pigments were found on the fibers, not blood. Watch the video 'The mystery of the Shroud of Turin with Walter C.McCrone'. He was a highly respected and influential microscopist, often referred to as the 'father of modern microscopy' due to his extensive work. We should trust his expertise regarding the Shroud. McCrone analyzed fibers from both the edges and the image itself. Watching the suggested video will reveal his analysis papers, showing results and values from the image areas. He believed that iron oxide was used for the body image and a mixture of iron oxide and vermilion was used for the "blood" marks. The assertion by some proponents of the Shroud's authenticity that he did not examine the image is false, as they wish to maintain its genuineness. McCrone explained that the only colored materials he found on the Shroud, including in the image areas, were inorganic pigments and the yellowing of the medium. This evidence clearly shows that the Shroud of Turin is a medieval artwork used as a forgery. If you want to dig deeper into this; see the research paper 'The reddish color of bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin: investigation of two hypotheses.' Found at MedCrave under journals. Name: Journal of Historical Archaeology & Anthropological Sciences. Document name is Jhaas-05-00223.pdf

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

Lanciano Eucharistic miracle has AB blood type same as the Shroud of Turin

[@tobias4411]

​@@TheresaCronin-kc6wzThere was no blood on Shroud, already posted evidence for this.

[@jonstaley-q5p]

Upon Tarpeian rock called Calvary in Rome Christ the Greatest Egyptian Pharaoh of all time The King Of The Jews The Count of Monte Christo General Sicarius King Simon Justus Arshakuni Bar Giora Izates Mono Bazus II there Sotor and Kedamon suffered for them, He carried there military cross all the way to Golgotha for there infidelitys to atone, Then they nailed Him to his military Cross Great was the pain and the loss of his 40,000 jewish army, He suffered it all for them He suffered it all Because they all loved him and died for him, There military Savior and Lord and preserver died On the cross in Rome was crucified No greater love by mortal man Has ever been known Oh, praise His sweet name, Then they carried Him away Placed Him in a lonely grave Then they thought that this would be The end of this man But on that third and glorious day God came and rolled the stone away He arose from the dead.

[@kimfleury]

I do wish you would have given warning in the introduction. I don't mind that you used an AI voice to save your own, but if you were going to use that, I would prefer an American accent. I was distracted by the AI accent and had a hard time following it.

[@trentitybrehm5105]

Is the voice the actual guy, or is it AI like the image? I'm not trying to be funny, btw. If it's actually him speaking, he should think about getting a job doing voice overs or something xD

[@CapturingChristianity]

It’s AI :)

[@randomquestion8616]

So we proved Jesus was a real person but we already knew that? Very few people deny his existence.

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

How cavalier of you

[@Sarah-wt7pl]

Everyone knows that Jesus existed; it gives evidence of Jesus’ resurrection which most sceptics don’t believe in

[@randomquestion8616]

@@Sarah-wt7plhow does this prove the resurrection? It proves he was buried

[@randomquestion8616]

@@TheresaCronin-kc6wzthx g

[@Sarah-wt7pl]

@@randomquestion8616 yes! The image on the cloth wouldn’t have been possible without the radiation the radiation emitted from Christ body was so powerful that all the energies combined wouldn’t have been able to generate this power hence leaving an image on the cloth. There are several videos on this. That’s why it’s creating so much buzz! It wouldn’t have been a big news if the it just proved the death of Christ.

[@feedjake9995]

What’s with the ai

[@joshuarivera2422]

Is his research, how is he not going to defend it? The title is misleading, like if a top scientist not related to the research is agreeing with the evidence, but its not. Again, you need to take some steps back, even Trent Horn said we need to be cautios and not jump to conclusions.

[@TheMindOfBrandon]

Apparently Jesus' skeleton and organs didn't radiate through the cloth as he was resurrecting; just the front and back. Not even the top of the head...🤣

[@JadDragon]

Praise Yahweh the one true God. Revealed Triune as Father, Spirit, and Jesus the Son, each member fully God of which there is only one. 3 distinct Persons coexistant, coequal, and coeternal sharing 1 Divine Essence. Jesus lives and is God, Christ, King. Repent of your sin and believe in Him and be saved to eternal life!

[@mkl2237]

Your (our) buddy Testy will surely fire off a rebuttal by the non-scientist Dr Falk !

[@amaizenblue44]

Well of course one of the paper's authors is going to defend it. Like, duh. Why should I accept this new dating method over one (carbon dating) that has been well respected for more than half a century?

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

We already have RETRACTION of Oxford lab in 2019 through peer-reviewed scientific article. This retratation article you find in Google easily

[@amaizenblue44]

@@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn you know this study only had a sample from the same location, right? Also, nothing got retracted. Oh, except for a 2017 paper by these authors. I dont think you understand what retraction means.

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@amaizenblue44 I think you still don't get it: we have a 2019 retraction related to the 1988 test (which was also obtained from a SAMPLE) and a 2017 retraction related to the 2017 test. And from 2022 until now we have had NO RETRACTIONS! Until proven otherwise! Retraction by retraction, we DEFINED the TIE and we are ahead due to a study that has not been refuted so far! Do you understand now, my friend?

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

@@amaizenblue44 You're the one who doesn't understand retraction here, but here goes: the 1988 carbon 14 test took 31 years to be retracted by the Oxford lab. Google it or anywhere else and you'll see the peer-reviewed article that was retracted. We also have the retraction of the 2017 article. In other words, no one won and no one lost! However, this latest study has not been retracted until proven otherwise! When it is retracted, then I'll prove you right! Do you accept my challenge?

[@amaizenblue44]

@@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn yes, I do understand. You have no idea what a retraction is. A retraction is when the journal that originally published the paper, basically un-publishes it. No such thing happened with the 1988 paper. What you mean is a *refutation* paper. So, let's see what the refutation was. They said the original study did not sample enough locations, and so they likely sampled an area that was repaired in the middle ages. Notice, they didn't say the dating was wrong, it was just not done on original material. Why is that a problem for the new WAXS study? Because their sample is from the same location. It says so right in their abstract. So that means either the 2019 refutation was wrong, or the new WAXS method is. Do you see why?

[@metroduck123]

You should have declared it at the beginning that you are corresponding with this scientist. Instead you play COY. Now that you are using AI, who is gonna take seriously anymore except for the crazies???

[@johnthequietmusic]

I gotta be honest man, I really do not like the AI element to this video. Very hard to focus on the information.

[@aleaann-ol8pc]

The Shroud may be considered from the same or close time line as Jesus' earthly time, but Scripture proves the Shroud does NOT have anything to do with Jesus physically. Read the Scriptures.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

Scripture also proves that the earth is immobile and has corners .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .

[@bournechupacabra]

I really hate the term "top scientist". Like what even is that supposed to mean?

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

Some were NASA Scientists others highly respected within their field. Top Scientists !

[@billbissenas2973]

Is this De Caro AI?

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

Yes

[@Obeytheroadrules]

Oh what a shock 😳, another Christian says the shroud is real

[@merlinator11]

Something refreshing for you. I'm a Christian. I don't think the shroud is real. I think the details of the gospel resurrection accounts indicate that.

[@MarcosSilveira-vx6nn]

Don't be like that, my friend! Many Christians DO NOT BELIEVE in the shroud, just as MANY ATHEISTS CONVERTED because of the shroud, such as Tristan Casabianca (France), David Rolfe (United Kingdom), etc. David Rolfe is an EX-ATHEIST who converted because of the shroud and they are offering 1 MILLION DOLLARS to anyone who can forge the shroud! What do you think about forging it and making your money?

[@tobias4411]

​@@MarcosSilveira-vx6nnYes, there is a 1,000,000$ reward. But since they still don't know what method was used to create it - it would be very hard to replicate it exactly. The reward offer is not a realistic offer because of this.

[@gaton023]

This seems weird. I would respectfully suggest to deliver the information in a different way, it my raise suspicions of face off AI, which makes the content unreliable. Sorry 😢. I'm just a little hesitant of AI use lately, with everything going on.

[@TheProdigalMeowMeowMeowReturns]

Is this an AI

[@TheMrJoltz]

I don’t like the thumbnail, seems fake looking. Generally not a fan of this format going on with AI. If he’s answering questions in written form it is better to post the words and read it over with us.

[@horridhenry9920]

The Shroud is as real as Dr. Liberato De Caro’s voice.

[@TheresaCronin-kc6wz]

The information is true

[@elionbio7977]

It's his own words through email but just AI to present it.

[@romansemlitsch5348]

Have you got an explanation for the image found on the shroud? Since not a single sceptic scientist has any even remotely plausible explanation for how forgery could have produced it, my best guess is you don't have one either.

[@horridhenry9920]

@@romansemlitsch5348 Do I need one. Do you understand the burden of proof? Have you got an explanation for the image on the shroud that does not involve magic?

[@MadeleineKuhl]

I lm knew so I find less testing true/ false biblical stories than science theory’s. I did bio chemistry and have worked in mostly spirt science. The first couple of labs starting in carb n I sat back and was overwhelmed with the laws and regulations of basic atoms are so overwhelming majestic. Dust matter jokes Breathed in life Speaking into existence Air comes from wind through vocal cords 🔌 Caves are earth harps It’s his Selfie to show his almighty wisdom . I just read the cloth folded ? It’s clearly Jesus saying there is gonna be phone selfies and AI so I’ll leave them this cloth to show who is the sound wave Wi-Fi boss. In all love to all Jesus can be funny in watch this The best things that bring peace Hebrews tea with some hot cross fruit buns Rolling Stones music and music knowledge Deadlifting The holy shot in basketball Allowing protection of trusted Elon so he can capture Gods comet ☄️ Best ice cream in AU Peter’s by the sea Or just Peters dairy in general Mathew is IMRAD And our beloved bread and wine 🍷 God bless Thanks 😊

[@ricrob2]

this is hard to watch

[@MarkoZorecHimself]

Oh no, just please don't use AI-generated voices to talk about spiritual matters... Please... I already hate AI-generated voices, they are one of the worst things that could have happened to us, having to listen to them. They dumb things down, take away the soul, lack feeling, are artificial, dead, and lifeless.

[@Ghost_bros]

What the heck is up with this AI and robot voice

[@Paradicted]

Immediately lost interest and clicked away after staring at that annoying AI image and annoying AI voice. Takes away all credibility of the premise of this video which is sad because I definitely believe the shroud is the genuine article.

[@charlesmiller6281]

Me too. Word for word.

[@smokedaodblunt3755]

Yea dont use A.i man cant watch

[@danielkirienko1701]

Speaking solely about the retraction of their 2017 paper, the interviewee gives a misleading response. Neither the fact that the authors of the 2017 paper responded to the retraction nor the fact that the editors didn't respond to the authors' response means that the retraction has any different woeght than it would if the authors never filed their response with the editors. The paper was retracted. End of discussion. The authors' protestations (a common occurrence after an editorial decision to retract a paper) doesn't affect either the fact that it was retracted or the consensus of the community. This paper, like all others, should be read and considered on its own merits. The editorial retraction and the authors' response may frame that discussion and provide additional detail. But this isn't tennis. The authors' response to the editors' retraction isn't a volley that rescues the paper until the editors respond again. That's not how science (or science publishing) works. To think it is how it works is just...weird.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

Ridiculous. Science is not determined by journal editors, who often get things wrong. A retraction by editors means nothing as far as the science is concerned. The editors owe it to the science community to publish the rejoinder to the retraction so letters to the editor can be published and discussed. That they have not done so smacks of suppression.

[@danielkirienko1701]

​@sliglusamelius8578 you didn't read what I wrote and you misunderstand the process. No, editors don't decide whether the science is good or not. But neither does the authors' response to the retraction notice. The editors have no responsibility or requirement to reply to it. If they chose to do so, they would not have any obligation to do so to any further response from the authors. That's simply not how it works. Your belief that they haven't responded indicates "suppression" is little more than the kind of response you hear from people who claim we never landed on the moon. In other words, it is uninformed conspiracy theorizing. I'll give it no weight. I encourage others to do the same.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@danielkirienko1701 More nonsense. They made an editorial decision to retract a paper in science techniques which they are not expert at. Very few people are expert at that science. The fact that they have not allowed a rebuttal is suppression. Science doesn't work by suppression. All parties should be able to discuss the science contained therein. I would note that the retraction I read was only regarding the question of creatinine on the cloth and its association with a traumatic death, and not about the dating of the shroud.

[@danielkirienko1701]

​@sliglusamelius8578 I'm going to try one last time. First, the retraction was based not solely on the creatine, as you suggest. It was based on the editors' decision that a) the evidence didn't not support their conclusions, in the opinion of the editors, at least in part due to missing controls. (Whether other people have run similar controls in separate experiments is irrelevant; you run your own controls.) And that b) the authenticity of the material was in question due to the source, which was inappropriately not mentioned during the initial submission. Second, the authors' response IS available, right now, on the PLoS One website. It's in the community posts section. You can feel that the editors have some responsibility to link it to the main paper the way that the retraction was, but you'd be wrong. That's just not how these things work. If the authors wish to rebut the retraction, they should do a better study and publish that. Better yet, they should get someone else to corroborate their results. With better controls and honest disclosures. At the end of the day, this isn't being 'suppressed.' It's being handled the same as any other scientific matter would be. And part of me suspects THAT IS WHY YOU'RE UPSET. As the saying goes, if you expect privilege and get treated with equality, it feels like discrimination.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@danielkirienko1701 The article was about creatinine and not creatine (they are not the same). That data point is the least important one related to the WAXS technique; the age of the shroud is the important data point. The retracted article was only about the question of creatinine found in the blood on the shroud. The age of the shroud based on WAXS was published elsewhere, and has not been retracted as far as I know. It is deceiving to suggest that this video is based on a retracted article when in fact the publication about the age of the shroud has not been retracted. Creatinine is merely a marker for muscle injury and simply corroborates that fact the the victim was under severe physical stress. It is not critical to the evidence about the age of the shroud..

[@tomnoyb8301]

Isaiah53 says Shroud is FAKE.

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

The same book says that the earth doesn't move and has corners (LOL)

[@tomnoyb8301]

@@jeffreyerwin3665 - If one doesn't believe Bible in the first place, then they don't believe in most anything else having too do with Shroud. They don't believe there is a Messiah, a Jesus who performed miracles that got Him crucified in the first place nor most other things leading up to and subsequent to Jesus burial. Natural question is then, why such a purportedly logical person would be trolling Christian channels? Are you offended science got it wrong in this case? Do you see yourself as the 'defender of science?' Or do you have some personal connection of a solid earth vs the Shroud? Or four corners of (round) compasses vs Shroud?

[@jeffreyerwin3665]

@@tomnoyb8301 Sir, my comment was meant to illustrate that scripture must be consistent with science and historical facts to be considered valid. The images on the Shroud have been investigated by scientists and ther conclusion is that these images are not paintings of any kind and are not the work of an artist. If the Shroud were a "fake" as you suggest, these scientists would have easily discovered that fact. Sir, I believe that you have a bias against the authenticity of the Holy Shroud and are reading too much into Is. 53 in your attempt to justify that bias.

[@tomnoyb8301]

​@@jeffreyerwin3665 - Yet there have been lifelike reenactments of Jesus' last day for centuries (some in Africa, some in Indonesia), why has not one of these so-called "scientist's" wrapped participants (after having been whipped, scourged, crowned and nailed) in linen for a few hours afterward, then waited a few decades to see what develops? Why can these supposed brainiacs only think of painting the image, instead of recreating the conditions? Isaiah says Messiah has nothing that we should desire him, yet Shroud-man is tall and handsome - both desirable qualities. That's not bias, those are facts. Just the fact proponents of the Shroud pretend not to think of how the fraudsters surely made the Shroud, leads one to suspect fraud. Nobody is so stupid to push the Shroud without pursuing such a simple test (present company excepted, am in no way implying you are one such idiot nor complicit in the fraud). Reenactment notwithstanding, it still doesn't trump Isaiah's words. Shroud is a fake whether reenactment succeeds or not.

[@tobias4411]

​@@jeffreyerwin3665Sir. Red ochre (iron oxide) and vermilion (mercury sulfide) pigments were found on the fibers, not blood. Watch the video 'The mystery of the Shroud of Turin with Walter C.McCrone'. He was a highly respected and influential microscopist, often referred to as the 'father of modern microscopy' due to his extensive work.

[@FishermensCorner]

Meanwhile reality, the Catholic Church keeps the scientific studies limited to themselves... like all other supposed miracles...

[@dr.tafazzi]

You're dead wrong. What do you mean "limited to themselves"??? The lab that these results came from are not in a church owned lab, nor in a church-affiliated hospital or foundation. It's Italy's national research institute. Not catholic.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

False. You're hearing about it right now. This guy is not a Vatican employee lol. The sturp team was not Vatican people. What are you talking about??

[@FishermensCorner]

@@dr.tafazzi Rome is where?

[@FishermensCorner]

@@sliglusamelius8578 are you a child? this is the same story over and over.

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@FishermensCorner Miracles from Lourdes are analyzed by MDs. The shroud was analyzed by atheist and Jewish scientists of the sturp team. The scientist who did the WAXS study is a secular scientist at a research institution. Rome is not the Vatican lol. You're doing mental backflips just because you refuse to accept facts.

[@yeshuadaking8705]

How do we know that info actually came from De Caro? Because clearly you weren’t actually talking to him.

[@trentitybrehm5105]

IKR. I can't tell if he actually interviewed the guy and just did an AI pic, took what he said and did AI voice and pic, or if he didn't interview him and came up with these questions to frame the video as an interview and used AI voice for what the Doctor has already written before. It's off putting and I don't like it

[@sliglusamelius8578]

@@trentitybrehm5105 These were email exchanges. He explains that later.

[@charlesmiller6281]

Because he made the awful decision to make the video in a way that screams FAKE AI GARBAGE without explaining he used AI to "read" what the doctor wrote him in emails. This wasn't noted anywhere until he pinned it as a comment.

[@sigurdholbarki8268]

​@@charlesmiller6281it's pretty obvious after two seconds that's what it is, get a grip

[@charlesmiller6281]

@@sigurdholbarki8268 Yes it is obvious it is AI. Problem is it is not obvious at all that the AI is reading text from a real human being. Looks and sounds fake, with nothing to tell us it isn't. THAT'S the problem!