#39,338 in Books
Use arrows to jump to the previous/next product
Reddit mentions of The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!
Sentiment score: 1
Reddit mentions: 2
We found 2 Reddit mentions of The Shroud of Turin: First Century after Christ!. Here are the top ones.
or
- M.2 2280, HP controller Offering with 4 flash memory channels that support PCIe 3.1 x4 and NVMe 1.3
- Sequential read/write speeds up to 2, 100 Mbps/ 1, 500 Mbps, an industry top leading reliability (MTBF) 2M hours, and endurance (TBW) up to 200 TBW
- Higher order LDPC error Correction for high speed parallel decoding and real time error Correction to ensure data integrity and security
- Works on all Windows PC, Full compatibility with host.Exe (HP software pre-installation environment). Ideal upgrade for HP PCs
- Manufactured to HP high quality standards and fully tested and CERTIFIED in HP laboratories. Not intended for use in HP workstations
Features:
Specs:
| Height | 9.5 Inches |
| Length | 6.5 Inches |
| Number of items | 1 |
| Weight | 1.69976404002 Pounds |
| Width | 1 Inches |
Returning to posting just to tell everyone to stop trying to make this happen. I'm a Catholic and an analytical chemist, and I've read the papers.
The scientific studies purporting to "prove" the shroud's origin are just awful. Behind the vast majority are Giulio Fanti, whose recent career has involved studying nothing but the shroud, which he's clearly convinced is real before performing the experiments (this is not good science). His main results are rejected by the scientific community--the tests used to establish an origin around 0 AD were not published in a scientific journal, but in a book Fanti wrote (because they were not considered reputable) (1). The tests he used (including IR, Raman, and a mechanical test) did not follow established protocols; they were calibrated in Fanti's lab, verified by no other party, and immediately used to date the shroud. The archbishop of Turin has claimed "there is no value to these experiments" (2). Some of the results Fanti actually managed to get published (the so called "biological evidence") have been retracted as "data presented in this article are not sufficient to support the conclusions drawn". (3)
You can question the carbon dating if you like--but there is not any real evidence supporting the shroud's origin ~0 AD. Given that the shroud was entirely unknown until the 14th century, a much earlier origin is unlikely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJnncI3XjyQ
It is a very interesting study and one of the latest books virtually proved it is genuine. Will give you details later
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/9814669121/ref=tmm_hrd_title_0?ie=UTF8&qid=&sr=#sims-fbt-shipping-details_1542242293111
by Giuliani Fanti, but also Bernard Ruffin and Ian Wilson. Also by one of best believing historians (Warren H. Carroll)