Evidence for God from Science

bippy123 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Love you bips

Love you to sis

RickD wrote:

bippy123 wrote:

Storyteller wrote:Love you bips

Love you to sis

Group huggggggggg rick
Oh by the way where is darth you know who

After my wife passed away in her bed last month I noticed a very slight circular discoloration, about 8 inches in diameter, on the ceiling directly above her bed. I painted this ceiling only last year and there was no markings on it. I'm not kidding or trying to be a smart ass. Others have seen it. It is hard to see. The illumination in the room has to be just right. There was nothing on the ceiling and I have no explanation for it.

After my wife passed away in her bed last month I noticed a very slight circular discoloration, about 8 inches in diameter, on the ceiling directly above her bed. I painted this ceiling only last year and there was no markings on it. I'm not kidding or trying to be a smart ass. Others have seen it. It is hard to see. The illumination in the room has to be just right. There was nothing on the ceiling and I have no explanation for it.

Does God still do miracles? Unquestionably! And remember, the miracles in Scripture are not typically in rapid-fire succession, as they are spread over long sequences of time. And in NT days, NEW Scripture was being broken, and so, just like with the Prophets, God used the miraculous to show that it was by HIS authority that these men taught and wrote what they did. It wasn't for magic tricks. And it was also to create and build faith. Funny thing, though - whenever God did miracles in Scripture, there tended to be NO doubt that they were God caused. They weren't like the vague images of Jesus people claim to see in their toast, in tree stumps, or supposed photos of angels. No - they were made to be clearly known that A) they were miracles and B) that they were from the Lord. So, I would say, unless one has powerful reasons to believe a stain on the ceiling is a miracle of God, then at best, it's pure speculation and likely not the case. God's miracles are obvious, because God wants them and their Cause (Himself) to be unmistakable!

Might want to get some Kilz - great for preventing such!

Can anyone confirm if this is old news, or has been debunked/verified.

The Shroud’s Oscillating Man

...

In short, the documentary, based on the work of scientists in Sicily, claims to have made new discoveries about the Shroud based on “photogrammetry” — the science of making distance measurements of surfaces depicted on photographs. Using this technique, and high-resolution imagery, the scientists say they’ve found a number of objects on the body of the man in the Shroud — including, remarkably, tefillin, small leather boxes containing Scripture passages that observant Orthodox Jews wear strapped to their left arm and to their heads while praying.

Even more interesting, the scientists claim that their study has shown that the image on the Shroud is not static, but actually depicts a slight oscillation. It is, they say, like stroboscopic photograph, showing slight movement of the figure as intense bursts of energy emanate from his body. Here’s an example of a modern professionally taken stroboscopic photograph:

More

We need to call in our resident Shroud of Turin expert: BIIIIPPPPYYY!!!

What is new about these contentions about the Shroud?

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/07/ ... s-say.html

Calling Bippy!!!

However, Priest cautioned that the conclusions were based on body parts held in a fixed position, rather than accounting for carrying a body, cleaning a body, or preparing a body for burial, which might bear more study

.

Of course, skeptics won't read the above.

LOL!

Rule number 1 of proving a fake or forgery:
Make it. Make the forgery to show how it was done.

This has NOT been done,period.
Some have claimed to do it, but have come way short and considering that this is, supposedly, a medieval fake, one wonders why, with modern tech, no one has been able to replicate it.

Paul:
Rule number 1 of proving a fake or forgery:
Make it. Make the forgery to show how it was done.

This has NOT been done,period.
Some have claimed to do it, but have come way short and considering that this is, supposedly, a medieval fake, one wonders why, with modern tech, no one has been able to replicate it.

Absolutely! This is a sleight of hand distraction - as in, "Look over here at this one partial but basically meaningless study meant to distract us from the far more glaring and enormous issue over there - of an ancient artifact with such incredible detail and negative, three-dimensional image that modern science, after more scrutiny that any other ancient artifact, cannot figure out how it was produced, much less be able to replicate it."

Hey guys sorry I haven’t been on in a long time . Just got done last week burying my mom, it’s been a very stressful 3 years for me .

I just finished prepping my car for driving cause me and a friend were going to pass out food to the homeless but she got delayed so we are going to do it on Monday .

Ok I checked that article and while I don’t have the time to do my usual research I went to the blog I trust most my buddy Stephen jones whose a much better expert on the shroud then me .

And I searched through the front page of his blog and it looks like he will be responding to this research article in the very near future . Stephen is
A very cool dude . He’s a Calvinist who believes in the authenticity of the shroud which is rare since john Calvin himself didn’t believe in it .

Here is the part of his blog where he talks about this .
http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/?m=0
I will respond to the article, "The Bloodstains on the Shroud of Turin Are Probably Fake, Say Forensic Experts," BuzzFeed, July 14, 2018, Dan Vergano, and other similar articles, in the near future (after my Date Index 2010, Shroud of Turin News July 2018, and my next "On this day 30 years ago in the radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud". In the meantime, read "Shroud of Turin expert criticises new study casting doubt on authenticity," Catholic Herald, 19 Jul 2018, Junno Arocho Esteves:
"`Does it seem like a scientific criterion to take a mannequin — like the ones used to display clothes in a store window — and a sponge soaked in fake blood attached to a piece wood that is pressed on the right side of a dummy to see where the streams of blood fall?' Marinelli asked. `If this is considered science, I guess I'll just have to take my degree in natural sciences and throw it away,' she said."
Also read, "`Not scientific!' Catholic Church HITS BACK after Turin Shroud `fake' claims," Daily Express, July 19, 2018, Ciaran McGrath:
"Pierluigi Baima Bollone, honorary president of the International Centre of Sindonology of Turin ... said: `I have read that the work that has been presented is based on a system called BPA [Bloodstain Pattern Analysis], very criticised on a scientific level. This method – in many court cases in which it was used – has created many problems and has been disavowed.'"
Now also read, "An Unrealistic Approach and Analysis of the Blood Flows on the Shroud of Turin," July 27, 2018, Mark Antonacci:
"From these experimental results [by Borrini and Garlaschelli], which differ from comparable blood flows on the Shroud of Turin, the authors conclude the blood flow patterns on the Shroud are unrealistic and indicate they were the result of artistry or were faked. In this article I will briefly explain how both sets of experiments are flawed in several respects, how the blood flows on the Shroud are quite realistic, and how the authors' conclusions are necessarily flawed. All of the comments that I will make about the blood marks on the multiply-wounded crucifixion victim wrapped in the Shroud are supported by decades of research by numerous pathologists, physicians, anatomists, battlefield surgeons, scientists and forensic experts ..."
I will remove the above "The Bloodstains ..." items in the final installment of this media release, but I will add it to my Shroud of Turin News of July 2018.

Stu wrote: ↑Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:30 am Can anyone confirm if this is old news, or has been debunked/verified.

The Shroud’s Oscillating Man



...

In short, the documentary, based on the work of scientists in Sicily, claims to have made new discoveries about the Shroud based on “photogrammetry” — the science of making distance measurements of surfaces depicted on photographs. Using this technique, and high-resolution imagery, the scientists say they’ve found a number of objects on the body of the man in the Shroud — including, remarkably, tefillin, small leather boxes containing Scripture passages that observant Orthodox Jews wear strapped to their left arm and to their heads while praying.

Even more interesting, the scientists claim that their study has shown that the image on the Shroud is not static, but actually depicts a slight oscillation. It is, they say, like stroboscopic photograph, showing slight movement of the figure as intense bursts of energy emanate from his body. Here’s an example of a modern professionally taken stroboscopic photograph:

More

I’ll try to run this by Stephen jones on Monday
Guys I wish I had more time but I work so much that I barely get time to breath . My younger brother is in the SSI process but they said it could take 2 years before he sees a judge . If anyone knows how I could speed the process of a court date up please
Let me know .

Gosh , feels like old times . Wonder how Pierson is doing .
God bless you guys and thank you for all your prayers .

[BBvideo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6iQGomNqTw[/BBvideo]Youtube video of the study in question:

Paul, quite impressive. I somehow manages to watch the entire video - VERY dryly put, could have used better labeling on the overlays. The video contends that A) the energy source that produced the image on the Shroud came for inside the body and B) that in the seconds that some immense energy burst forth, photographic-like imagery was produced upon the Shroud as the body began to move, creating multiple images indicating this movement. This is something I've not previously heard about.

Philip wrote: ↑Tue Jun 12, 2018 9:07 am We need to call in our resident Shroud of Turin expert: BIIIIPPPPYYY!!!

Philip ask and you shall receive . My buddy Stephen jones has written a critique on this study.

It seems that this research isn’t new at all . It was done in 2014 and presented at a conference and it’s full of holes .

I haven’t read the full critique yet but what I read so far already makes their study look bad

Maybe someone here can review jones critique

Here’s the link

http://theshroudofturin.blogspot.com/20 ... l.html?m=1

Guys from what little I read of this critique it looks very bad for Luigi and his partner .the study ignores all the evidences from major medical experts that completely refuted them . Also they are not medical experts themselves .

Who the heck passed this through peer review lol
They must have been on some good arak (Lebanese alcoholic drink 200 proof lol)