Reply With QuoteIt's in the Daily Mail! It must be true!
Or not
Frankly absurd to be honest.
Computer artists claim to have recreated the face of Jesus Christ using digital technology.
The image was created by taking information and blood encoded on the Turin Shroud - the blood-stained linen that many believe was the burial cloth of the crucified Jesus Christ - and transforming it into a 3D image.
In a two-hour TV special on the History Channel, to air in the U.S. tonight, the computer artists will reveal their image of Jesus in full.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...#ixzz0jgXV0ndE
It's in the Daily Mail! It must be true!
I wonder if the Mail ever polls its online readers asking if they believe what they read. If it did, would it publish the results, and would anyone actually believe them anyway?Originally Posted by Croydon Bob
Just a thought.
It's on the History Channel, it's doubly true.
Actually, I think they belive what the mail writes. Look at the the comments 0.oI wonder if the Mail ever polls its online readers asking if they believe what they read. If it did, would it publish the results, and would anyone actually believe them anyway?
Just a thought.
I liked this one, has to be typo of the day, my bolding but actually from site.
The shroud of Turin "has not" proven to be a fake as the scientific testes were proven to be inconclusive.
I'm still waiting for the day when these shroudists finally realise that even if it is shown to be 2000yrs old, even if the image on it is shown to be the imprint of a human body (dodgy proportions aside) it still doesn't prove its the image of Christ.
Think I'm in for a long wait.
skb
if it is 2000 years old, then it *could* be Jesus. That's faith summed up!
That is beyond awesome!
An old Irish song in reference to the rubbish spewed from that newspaper I refuse to type the name of.
A reference people may not know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumann_na_mBan
Sorry more about that unmentionable rag from University Challenge
Just for the sake of the facts. The Turin shroud has been carbon dated by several institutions and the date has been shown to be medieval (mid to late 1200's).
Critics claim that the section taken for carbon dating was not original but from an area repaired in medieval times. The fact that this is retrospective criticism and that the area chosen for dating was overseen by the church seems to have escaped them. In addition, if the criticism were true then it would not be difficult to repeat the dating but no more samples will be released (modern dating using AMS requires no more than 2 mg of carbon by the way).
Let's not let the evidence get in the way of a good story, however.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks