Stephen E. Jones

Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified quotes: January-December 2014

[Home] [Updates] [Site map] [My Quotes; Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified, Classified] [My The Shroud of Turin blog]

The following are quotes added to my Shroud of Turin unclassified quotes in January-December 2014. See copyright conditions at end.

[Index: Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May, Jun, Jul, Aug, Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec]


Jan [top]
1/01/2014 "Given credence, the carbon-dating result effectively raises the Shroud to the status of a miracle, an object that defies, if not a law of nature, a law of culture. All artefacts are linked to the art and technology of the society in which they originate. Something that cannot be explained in terms of its (presumed) cultural context invites a supernatural explanation. As far as I am aware, no one has yet argued that the Shroud was deposited in medieval France by aliens, but after the carbon dating Cardinal Ballestrero did suggest attributing it to 'the supernatural intervention of God', likening it to the famous Madonna of Guadalupe, a painting that, according to Catholic belief, appeared miraculously on the cloak of a Mexican peasant in 1531. [Bollone, B., 1998, "Sindone: la prova," Milan, p. 120]. Those of a more critical frame of mind may find this idea difficult to accept. There is no better explanation, though, for a fourteenth-century Shroud." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.167-168). 1/01/2014 "The other reason to reject the 1988 result - really a raft of reasons - is that it conflicts with all the evidence that points to the Shroud having been in existence long before 1260: the fact that the lignin in the fibres of the cloth has lost its vanillin, indicating that it is over 1,300 years old; the fact that the image derives from an actual victim of crucifixion, a practice outlawed in Christendom in the fourth century; the fact that the scourge marks testify to the use of a Roman flagrum; and the fact that the technical features of the weaving and stitching conform to practices known in antiquity, not the Middle Ages. And this is only the evidence we have adduced so far. In the next chapter we will consider various historical and art-historical arguments that enable us to say where the Shroud was long before 1260 - as far back, indeed, as the sixth century. To stick dogmatically to a fourteenth-century date for the Shroud in the face of all this counter-evidence would be quite irrational, especially when the carbon-dating project was so manifestly flawed." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.168). 1/01/2014 "So, what could have gone wrong? This is a much more difficult question, and nearly a quarter of a century after the event sindonologists are still scratching their heads over it. The strange refusal of the Catholic Church to permit further examination of the cloth has been a major impediment to understanding. Essentially, though, there are three possibilities. The first is that the Shroud sample given to the laboratories was contaminated in some way or chemically altered, so that the C-14 levels they detected were greater than they should have been. In the vast majority of cases, when carbon-dating tests yield suspect results, it is because some natural process has interfered with the regular ticking of the radiocarbon clock. The most obvious explanation for the dubious carbon-dating result is that some form of contamination was present or that the level of C-14 in the material was otherwise enhanced. As noted above, the measurement errors caused by such processes can be spectacular - in the range of thousands of years." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.168). 1/01/2014 "There is evidence that tests on linen are particularly prone to distortion. In the late 1970s Dr Rosalie David of the Manchester Museum had samples from an Egyptian mummy carbon-dated at the British Museum, only [169] to find that the bandages were dated 800 to 1,000 years younger than the body. [Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," p.193] She didn't believe the mummy could have been re-wrapped, and she had received other anomalous results as well. In 1997 David coauthored an article (along with Harry Gove and others) in which new experiments conducted on ancient Egyptian ibis mummies were reported. It was found that 'there was a very significant discrepancy, an average of 550 years, between the dating of the mummy's linen wrappings and the mummy itself'. [Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," p.229] Two reasons have been suggested for the anomalous linen results: either that the porosity of the fibres makes them particularly susceptible to contamination, or that, because crop plants have a short life span, they reflect short- term fluctuations in the C-14 levels." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.168-169). 1/01/2014 "The samples used in the 1988 test were cleaned using standard methods, but, as Gove remarks, 'One of the problems with small samples is that one never knew when the cleaning procedure was sufficient.' And he also makes the following point: 'All of the labs used the same cleaning technique, and if there's some kind of contaminant that was not taken care of, it would give the same answer to all three labs, and all three would be wrong.' [Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," pp.160, 291]." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.168-169). 1/01/2014 "Various suggestions have been made regarding potential sources of contamination. An early suggestion was that some form of C-14 enrichment took place in 1532, when the Shroud was scorched and burnt. [Kouznetsov et al. 1996. For criticism of this paper, see Jull et al. 1996] An alternative argument, popular in some quarters, is that the Resurrection was a radioactive event which converted some of the C-12 in the cloth into C- 14. [Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud," 2000, pp.159-64] Another theory is that developed by Dr Leoncio Garza-Valdes, a Texan microbiologist, who believes that the Shroud sample was covered with a `bioplastic coating', i.e. a transparent, natural varnish produced by bacteria and fungi. [(Garza-Valdes, L.A., 1998, "The DNA of God?," pp.2-3] Some of these theories are more plausible than others, but none has gained widespread acceptance, let alone been proven. Without access to the Shroud, it is difficult to see how any further progress can be made in this type of investigation." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.169). 1/01/2014 "The second possibility is that the cloth cut from the Shroud was not actually part of its original fabric but was a careful repair made during the late Middle Ages or Renaissance. This idea has been vigorously promoted by two amateur researchers, Sue Benford and Joe Marino. [Benford, S. & Marino, J., 2002, "Historical Support of a 16th Century Restoration in the Shroud C-14 Sample Area."; Benford, S. & Marino, J., 2005, "New Historical Evidence Explaining the `Invisible Patch' in the 1988 C-14 Sample Area of the Turin Shroud."] The basic claim is that the relevant corner of the Shroud was repaired 'invisibly' using a technique known as 'French weaving', which even textile experts cannot necessarily detect by eye. Opinion seems to be split regarding the plausibility of this claim. Benford and Marino quote experts willing to entertain their suggestion, but it is strongly opposed by Flury- Lemberg, who says, 'even the most successful execution can ultimately not conceal [170] the operation completely to the trained eye, and it will always be unequivocally visible on the reverse of the fabric'. [Flury- Lemberg, M., 2007, "The Invisible Mending of the Shroud, the Theory and the Reality." BSTS Newsletter No. 65, June 2007, p.15.] She has inspected the back of the Shroud and denies there is any sign of reweaving." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.169-170). 1/01/2014 "Nevertheless, the repair hypothesis has recently received a shot in the arm from Ray Rogers, whose meticulous investigation of various Shroud samples, published in Thermochimica Acta shortly before he died in 2005, lends it a measure of support. Studying threads obtained from both the Raes sample and the adjacent carbon- dating sample, Rogers found that they were coated in a gum containing alizarin and red lakes - in other words, a dye. None of the threads he examined from the main body of the Shroud shared this dye. `The presence of alizarin dye and red lakes in the Raes and radiocarbon samples indicates that the color has been manipulated,' he wrote. 'Specifically, the color and distribution of the coating implies that repairs were made at an unknown time with foreign linen dyed to match the older original material.' [Rogers, R.N., 2005, "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin," Thermochimica Acta, 425, pp.189-194, p.192]. At the very least, Rogers's observations constitute evidence that the carbon-dating sample was taken from a suspect corner of the Shroud. Once again, though, it is impossible to say anything more until the Church fulfils John Paul II's promise and gives scientists further access to the cloth." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.170). 1/01/2014 "The third possibility is that a fraud was perpetrated, that genuine Shroud samples were deliberately swapped with cloth of a later date. Arguments to this effect have come from quarters as diverse as members of an ultra- conservative Catholic Counter-Reformation group, who think there was a Masonic plot to discredit the Shroud, and the 'heretical' German writers Holger Kersten and Elmar Gruber, who believe that the Catholic Church rigged the result, fearful that the Shroud might prove Jesus did not die on the cross. [Kersten, H. & Gruber, E.R., 1994, "The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection"] Most sindonologists regard these fraud theories as plainly incredible. Some, like Ian Wilson, refuse to contemplate such `unworthy' accusations. Wilson, I., 1998, "The Blood and the Shroud," pp.8, 11, 186, 219] However, scientific fraud is by no means unknown, as the editors of science journals are well aware. One only has to recall the infamous Piltdown Man hoax (which, incidentally, Teddy Hall was instrumental in unmasking) or the more recent case of Professor Hwang Woo-suk, whose fabricated research into human stem-cells was published in Science in 2004 and 2005. [Couzin, J., 2006, "Breakthrough of the Year: Breakdown of the Year," Science, Vol. 314, 22 December, p.1853]." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.170). 1/01/2014 "One important consideration weighs in favour of the possibility of deception. If the carbon-dating error was accidental, then it is a remarkable coincidence that the result tallies so well with the date always claimed by sceptics as the Shroud's historical debut. But if fraud was involved, then it wouldn't be a coincidence at all. Had anyone wished to discredit the Shroud, '1325 ▒ 65 years' [McCrone, W.C., 1999, "Judgment Day for the Shroud of Turin,", p.1] is precisely the sort of date they would have looked to achieve." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.170). 1/01/2014 "[171] The argument draws attention to the most absurd aspect of the whole affair: the unnecessary secrecy surrounding the packaging of the samples. Although they were present at the sampling, the carbon-dating scientists themselves could not be 100 per cent certain that the samples they received were from the Shroud. The 'complete knowledge' they wanted of the sampling process was broken the moment Tite and Ballestrero took the samples into the Sala Capitolare. From then on, the entire validity of the test rested on the competence and integrity of the cardinal and the representative of the British Museum. No one else knows what went on in that room. The conclusion that the linen of the Shroud is medieval rests ultimately, then, on the unseen behaviour of two men over the course of about half an hour - on trust, therefore, not on science. Given the magnitude of the issue, especially for the Church, the possibility of tampering cannot be discounted. As Meacham says, 'chain of evidence is important, to insure and be seen to insure that no tampering could have taken place'. [Meacham, W., "The Rape of the Turin Shroud," Lulu Press: Morrisville NC, 2005, p.144]." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.171). 1/01/2014 "Contamination, reweaving or fraud: three potential sources of error, any one of which could have caused the incorrect carbon dating of the Shroud. But can we legitimately reject the carbon-dating result without determining exactly what went wrong? Of course we can. Archaeologists routinely dismiss 'rogue' radiocarbon dates out of hand. The success of a carbon-dating result should never be declared unilaterally; it is always measured against other evidence. The 1988 test may therefore be declared null and void, even though, without further direct study of the Shroud, it is unlikely we will ever be able to say definitively what went wrong." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.171). 1/01/2014 "It is not just sindonologists who consider the carbon dating of the Shroud questionable. The thoroughly inconclusive nature of the 'conclusive evidence' trumpeted in the 1989 Nature article is acknowledged by the current head of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU), Professor Christopher Ramsey: `Anything is always provisional ... most scientific experiments are only verified by being repeated many times ... With the Shroud you're in a slightly difficult position, because obviously you can't go on dating it lots and lots of times. As a scientist I'm much more interested in getting the right answer than in sticking to an answer which we came to before.' [Ramsey, C.B., "Shroud of Turin Material Evidence," BBC Documentary TV Movie, Directed by David Rolfe, 22 March 2008] Ramsey speaks here as a prudent scientist. The 1988 carbon-dating result has not been verified by subsequent experiments, so we cannot be sure that the right answer has yet been obtained." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.170-171). 1/01/2014 "One year ago, as Science was assembling its 2005 Breakthrough of the Year issue, the need for a last- minute change became uncomfortably clear. A shadow was creeping across one of this journal's landmark papers, in which a team of South Korean and American researchers, led by Woo Suk Hwang at Seoul National University, claimed to have created the first-ever human embryonic stem cell lines that matched the DNA of patients. After anonymous allegations of irregularities in that paper appeared on a Korean Web site, South Korean authorities launched an investigation. As the story unfolded, Science's news editors hastily pulled an item about the Hwang achievements from the issue's roster of runners-up. Today, the fallout from the Hwang case is plain. Multiple inquiries discredited two papers Hwang published in Science in 2004 and 2005, which claimed some of the greatest accomplishments to date with human embryonic stem cells. The papers were retracted. But the scientific fraud, one of the most audacious ever committed, shattered the trust of many researchers and members of the public in scientific journals' ability to catch instances of deliberate deception. As it turned out, the Hwang debacle marked the beginning of a bad year for honest science. Incidents of publication fraud, if not on the rise, are garnering more attention, and the review process is under scrutiny. In June, European investigators reported that the bulk of papers by Jon Sudb°, formerly a cancer researcher at the Norwegian Radium Hospital in Oslo, contained bogus data. Those included two articles in The New England Journal of Medicine that described a new way of identifying people at high risk of oral cancer, a strategy that many clinicians were keen to apply to patients. Eric Poehlman, formerly a menopause and obesity researcher at the University of Vermont in Burlington, garnered perhaps the most dubious distinction of all: He became the first researcher in the United States to go to jail for scientific misconduct unrelated to patient deaths. The Hwang case, however, was unique for its combustible mix of startling achievements in a high-profile field and publication in a high-visibility journal. Manipulated images, purportedly of distinct stem cells matched to patients but in fact showing cells drawn from fertilized embryos, handily fooled outside reviewers and Science's own editors. `The reporting of scientific results is based on trust,' wrote Editor-in-Chief Donald Kennedy in a January 2006 editorial explaining why journals are not designed to catch fraud. It's a comment echoed often by journal editors facing the nightmare of faked data in their own pages. But the shock of the Hwang deception, along with other recent fraud cases, is jolting journals into a new reality. Five scientists and a top editor of Nature examined Science's handling of the Hwang papers, at the journal's request. Their report, published on Science's Web site earlier this month (www.sciencemag.org/sciext/hwang2005), concluded that operating in an atmosphere of trust is no longer sufficient. `Science must institutionalize a healthy level of concern in dealing with papers,' the group wrote. It recommended `substantially stricter' requirements for reporting primary data and a risk assessment for accepted papers. Science and some other journals are also beginning to scrutinize images in certain papers, in an effort to catch any that have been manipulated. Stem cell researchers, meanwhile, endured deep disappointment as a remarkable scientific advance evaporated before their eyes. Cloning early-stage human embryos, and crafting customized stem cell lines, is not the cakewalk some scientists hoped Hwang's papers had shown it to be. Stem cell researchers are backpedaling to more modest goals, just as Science and other journals consider how to prevent a breakdown of this magnitude from striking again." (Couzin, J., "Breakthrough of the Year: Breakdown of the Year," Science, Vol. 314, 22 December 2006, p.1853). 1/01/2014 "On the ORAU website, Ramsey justifies his lab's continuing interest in the Shroud as follows: `There is a lot of other evidence that suggests to many that the Shroud is older than the radiocarbon dates allow and so further research is certainly needed. It is important that we continue to test the accuracy of the original radiocarbon tests as we are already doing. It is equally important that experts assess and reinterpret some of the other evidence. Only by doing this will people be able to arrive at a coherent history of the Shroud which takes into account and explains all of the available scientific and historical information.' [Ramsey, C.B., "The Shroud of Turin," This is an eminently sensible statement. Oxford's participation in this ongoing research underlines the dubious status of the 1988 result." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.172). 1/01/2014 "The carbon dating of the Shroud will probably go down in history as one of the greatest fiascos in the history of science. It would make an excellent case study for any sociologist interested in exploring the ways in which science is affected by professional biases, prejudices and ambitions, not to mention religious (and irreligious) beliefs. And it should certainly serve as a warning to practitioners of any discipline tempted to - see their work as more important and 'fundamental' than any other. Research on the Shroud is like a microcosm of all human knowledge, a great multidisciplinary effort to describe a perplexing phenomenon as elegantly and comprehensively as possible. It so happens that, in the case of the Shroud, carbon dating has so far turned out to be less useful than a study of needlework. (Stitches are easier to observe and interpret than atom ratios, which makes them a relatively reliable source of information about old textiles.) Carbon dating may still make a valuable contribution to sindonology, if the Catholic Church ever allows further tests, and if those tests are integrated into a full, interdisciplinary research programme, as Professor Ramsey recommends. In the meantime, we can safely ignore it and concentrate on more productive avenues of research." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, p.172). 1/01/2014 "Long before the Shroud was even a twinkle in the eye of Gove and his carbon-dating crew, sindonologists were aware of historical evidence scattered references to a relic of Christ's burial cloth in Byzantium - that hinted at the Shroud's existence centuries before its appearance in the French village of Lirey. In 1978, as the campaign to carbon-date the Shroud cranked into gear, Ian Wilson published a remarkable new theory that offered to explain precisely where the Shroud had been - and why it was virtually unknown - for most of the first millennium AD. In the decades since, sindonologists have been patiently adding to this theory, so that the [173] ancient provenance of the Shroud can now be reconstructed with a fair degree of confidence. This historical and art-historical research complements the scientific clues regarding the cloth's age discussed in earlier chapters and fulfils the demand that the Shroud's whereabouts be traced back to antiquity, perhaps even to the first century." (de Wesselow, T., 2012, "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," Viking: London, pp.172-173). 11/01/2014 "The other question that has been asked is: if the statistical probability that the shroud dates between 1260 and 1390 is 95%, what is the probability that it could date to the first century? The answer is about one in a thousand trillion, i.e. vanishingly small." (Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol UK, p.303). 12/01/2014 "If the world knew of the opportunity that was present and then lost in the 1980s, it could then begin to comprehend the tragedy that occurred in the process of radiocarbon dating the Shroud of Turin. An opportunity existed to perform an entire range of scientific testing on an object that literally defies scientific knowledge and understanding and that contains a wealth of evidence with implications for everyone. This range of scientific testing was designed to investigate a variety of issues concerning authenticity, conservation, image-formation, age, origin, and history of the Shroud of Turin. Such tests would have been performed on the cloth as a whole, samples would have been removed, and additional data would have been acquired and brought back to laboratories around the world for further analysis, as was done in 1978. In addition, the entire range of scientific testing and sampling would have been performed by the most knowledgeable and qualified group of scientists in the world. Rarely, if ever, has an opportunity presented itself for the advancement of humankind's understanding and scientific knowledge, on a subject so important to people throughout the world than did this opportunity. The tragic fact is that only a small fraction of the planned scientific tests was actually performed, and this was performed under controversial circumstances with controversial results." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.155). 12/01/2014 "Radiocarbon dating, though perceived as definitive in terms of the cloth's age, can also be the most misleading of all the tests if not performed correctly. It was not performed correctly. This test was filled with errors for myriad reasons. Some of the underlying causes were lack of desire to advance scientific knowledge, and the desire to actually prevent [156] the full-fledged scientific investigation and testing from taking place on the Shroud of Turin. Such motives belonged to some who had little or no knowledge or experience with the Shroud of Turin, and were used to exclude the group of scientists who had the most extensive knowledge of and experience with the Shroud." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.155-156). 12/01/2014 "The d'Arcis Memorandum that alleged the Shroud was a medieval painting and the 1998 C-14 testing that also alleges the cloth dates to the medieval ages have many unfortunate similarities. Both were quite emphatic and perceived as definite. D'Arcis's memorandum was written with great intensity and its assertion definitively prevailed for centuries in the debate whether the Shroud was the authentic burial garment of Jesus. As shown in figure 131, the Shroud's date was smugly announced with an exclamation point. On the day of the announcement, Dr. Edward Hall of the Oxford carbon dating laboratory dismissed the Shroud during a televised interview as `a load of rubbish.' [Jennings, P., 1988, "Still Shrouded in Mystery;" <.i>30 Days in the Church and in the World, 1.7, pp.70-71.] While carbon dating certainly is not definitive, it is perceived as such. (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.158-159) 12/01/2014 "Both the d'Arcis Memorandum and the Shroud C-14 testing were also researched and prepared in a very poor manner. We saw in the last chapter how d'Arcis lacked any record at all from any of the several offices or people to support any part of his allegations. We will see in this and the next chapter how the directors of the carbon dating laboratories repeatedly failed to properly research, prepare, or even consider knowledgeable advice and information pertaining to the history and dating of the Shroud."(Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.158) 12/01/2014 "Furthermore, the conduct or the motives of d'Arcis and some of the directors of the carbon dating laboratories can be legitimately questioned. Not only did d'Arcis make very serious allegations of fraud based, at best, on mere rumor, he repeatedly accused the dean of the modest wooden church in Lirey of the worst kind of avarice, while the physical and financial condition of [159] his cathedral was in jeopardy. We shall also see in this, and especially the next chapter, repeated conduct on the part of the directors of some of the carbon dating laboratories that exemplify unprofessional motives and behavior." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.158-159) 12/01/2014 "Comprehensive scientific testing performed on the Shroud and its samples have conclusively proven that the contents of the d'Arcis Memorandum were impossible. The comprehensive future testing of the Shroud recommended at the end of this chapter and chapter 10 may also completely disprove the isolated results of the unprofessional 1988 carbon dating performed on the cloth. Recent scientific experiments with carbon dating of first-century linen cloth are already casting enormous doubts on those results. Recent examination of the Shroud's radiocarbon samples, as well as other recent scientific research, is also calling into question the accuracy and location of the carbon dating sample, and the procedures utilized in its removal and dating." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.159) 12/01/2014 "In light of the medical, scientific, archaeological, and historical evidence indicating that the Shroud was the burial garment of Jesus Christ, the question naturally rises, could something have happened to the cloth, as in numerous examples previously, that caused it to be contaminated with additional C-14? The answer to that question is not only yes, but there are many substantive, scientific explanations for how this could have occurred that have only recently been published. One event to consider is the unique image encoding event that occurred to the Shroud. Another possible influence could have been the fire of 1532. Other events in the Shroud's history could also have contaminated the cloth. The Shroud is known to have been repaired on several occasions in the past, and these repairs did factor into the radiocarbon dating of the cloth. A number of different contaminants are also known to have accumulated on the Shroud during its history that could have altered its radiocarbon date in ways that were not fully anticipated by the carbon dating laboratories." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, p.159). 12/01/2014 "When an object or sample is given to laboratories to be carbon dated, age is based on the assumption that all of the C-14 that is measured accrued in the object naturally, without any additional or newly created C-14 getting into the sample. If additional C-14 formed and remained in the cellulose of the Shroud either from N-14 or C-13, and then was measured, the age ascribed to it would be correspondingly incorrect. Rinaudo proved this by radiocarbon dating a 3400 B.C. Egyptian linen cloth before and after irradiating it with neutrons in the quantity first suggested by Phillips. The radiocarbon dating before neutron irradiation was in agreement with the mummy cloth's known historical age, but after irradiation, its age was shifted forty-six thousand years toward the future, five hundred centuries forward in time. [Rinaudo, J., `Protonic Model of Image Formation on the Shroud of Turin,' Third International Congress on the Shroud of Turin, Turin, Italy, June 5-7, 1998, pp. 5-6] We will review further the formation of the image on the Shroud in later chapters, but for now, note that many Shroud experts think that low-energy radiation, such as protons, alpha particles, long-wave X rays, or ultraviolet rays, was the key component of its cause. Under Rinaudo's method, an equal number of protons (at 1.135 million electron volts [MeV]) are released simultaneously with the neutrons. It is well known scientifically that air and linen attenuate protons, having an energy of about 1.1 MeV. These protons do not travel more than about 3 cm (1.18 inches) in air and 30 microns (two or three fibrils) in linen. These properties and this amount of proton energy will be shown to be ideally suited to produce the body images found on the Shroud. Moreover, in order to create similar conditions of observation or comparison between his experimental samples and the centuries-old Shroud, Rinaudo artificially aged his samples by subjecting them to elevated temperatures for a short time for ten hours at 150░C. 15 He found that, when his sample was irradiated with the above energy at a very low intensity, the linen cloth remained white. However, after it was artificially aged, it took on a very similar appearance to that of the Shroud body image. 16 This would be consistent with the development of the Shroud's body images over time. When Rinaudo computed the number of protons required to obtain an image like that on the Shroud, he also observed the corresponding number of neutrons necessarily present. Based on his earlier radiocarbon experiments with the Egyptian mummy linen cloth, he calculated the age change that would result from this corresponding number of neutrons. Significantly, he found the result to be an age shift of thirteen centuries. 17 This form of radiation *alone* could explain why the measured radiocarbon date for the Shroud was contrary to all the previous scientific, medical, [162] archaeological, and historical evidence that the Shroud wrapped the body of the historical Jesus Christ in the first century." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.160- 161. Emphasis original). 12/01/2014 "The carbon dating scientists were eager to date the Shroud but failed to realize the important tasks that went along with dating this unique object with a new method(s). Throughout the entire lengthy process, they failed to do the study and preparation required for dating an object with such a different and varied history, even though the sources were readily available. They even ignored expert advice in this regard. They also went back on their own written word several times and worked behind the scenes to eliminate other more knowledgeable scientists from conducting far more extensive tests of the Shroud. Historian Ian Wilson, who had numerous contacts with scientists from the carbon dating laboratories during the entire carbon dating process, and thereafter, commented upon their activities following the workshop: ` ... there was some intense politicking going on behind the scenes. Some of the radiocarbon-dating laboratories, now within a whisker of getting the go-ahead they had been waiting for, began to voice their disapproval of the idea of other scientific experiments being carried out on the Shroud at the same time as theirs, concerned that these might steal some of the thunder from their work.' [Wilson, I, 1998, "The Blood and the ShroudThe Free Press: New York, NY, p.183]. Italian writers Orazio Petrosillo and Emanuela Marinelli, who investigated the entire carbon dating process, also stated that the carbon dating laboratories ... manoeuvre had reeked of a political action intended to eliminate those [members of STURP] who use modern methods to deal with the problem in various disciplines, thus favoring access to the Shroud by only a very restricted circle of persons... .' [Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud," PEG: San Gwann, Malta, p.42]." (Antonacci, M., 2000, "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, pp.202-203. Emphasis original). 12/01/2014 "*Radiocarbon Dating* Three laboratories in a collaborative study independently radiodated samples from the Shroud of Turin by the Accelerator Mass Spectroscopy (AMS) method and reported a reasonably precise 14th century date in apparent agreement with its unequivocally known historic record. [Damon, P., et. al., <.i>Nature<./i> 1989, Vol. 337, pp.611-615] Unfortunately, a detailed protocol for sampling the Shroud, assuring both precision and accuracy, recommended by a convened group of consultants, was not followed. Only a single sample was taken in the lower corner of the main cloth of the frontal image below the so-called sidestrip from the selvage edge in an obviously waterstained area just a few inches from a burn mark. The selvage edge was trimmed off before portions of the sample were divided among the participating laboratories. Whether such an obviously contaminated sample is truly representative of the rest of the cloth is clearly questionable and the accuracy of the reported date is certainly doubtful." (Adler, A.D., 1996, "Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," EffatÓ Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.81-86, pp.82-83. Emphasis original. http://www.sindone.info/ADLER.PDF). 12/01/2014 "To assess this question we have carried out further spectroscopic investigations of samples from the STURP sticky tapes (Adler, Selzer, and DeBlase; technical details submitted for publication elsewhere). Nineteen assorted fibers representative of non-image, waterstain, scorch, image, backing cloth, and serum coated fibers were extracted from the tapes and characterized by previously reported methods. [Heller, J., Adler, A., <.i>Can. Soc. Forens. Sci. J<./i>. 1981, Vol. 14, pp.81-103] These were compared with fifteen single fibers taken from three threads from the radiocarbon sample. Similarly, two blood samples (previously designated as globs) were extracted from the tapes and compared against several types of blood controls. The blood controls included two simulacra: a traumatic blood clot exudate (whole blood diluted with bilirubin-enriched human albumin) and mineral simulated blood (iron oxide, cinnabar, and a trace of calcite suspended in gelatin). These samples were all examined by Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) microspectrophotometry and the fibers were also studied by scanning electron microprobe. Dried films of the two blood simulacra were also studied by Ultraviolet-Visible (UV-vis) spectrophotometry. Some typical FTIR spectral patterns of these samples from this study are shown in Figures 1 and 2." (Adler, A.D., 1996, "Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," EffatÓ Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.81-86, pp.82-83. Emphasis original. http://www.sindone.info/ADLER.PDF). 12/01/2014 "The patterns seen in Figure 1 are all distinguishably different from one another clearly indicating differences in their chemical composition. These compositional differences were further confirmed by peak frequency analysis utilizing the computer software that generates the spectral data. In particular the radiocarbon samples are not representative of the non-image samples that comprise the bulk of the cloth. This difference was also supported by the scanning electron microprobe data that showed gross enrichment of the inorganic mineral elements in the radiocarbon samples, even compared to the waterstain fibers taken from the bulk of the cloth. In fact, the radiocarbon fibers appear to be an exaggerated [83] composite of the waterstain and scorch fibers, thus confirming the physical location of the suspect radiosample site and demonstrating that it is not typical of the non-image sections of the main cloth. How much these differences in chemical composition actually affected the accuracy of the radiodate is not clear. However, these data are consistent with a recently proposed mechanism in which has been experimentally demonstrated that conditions comparable to those suffered by the Shroud in the 1532 fire can produce a large error in radiodating by large kinetic isotope effects. [Kouznetsov, D., Ivanov, A., Veletsky, V., Presented at the 209th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society, Anaheim, CA, April 1995] Alternatively, considering the presence of the selvage edge, this area may contain newly woven material as a repair. ." (Adler, A.D., 1996, "Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," EffatÓ Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.81-86, pp.82-83. Emphasis original. http://www.sindone.info/ADLER.PDF). 12/01/2014 "Some recent image analysis studies comparing the blood marks on the Shroud of Turin with those on the Cloth of Oviedo also cast doubt on the accuracy of the Shroud's radiodate (Whanger, Duke University, personal communication, May 1994). The Cloth of Oviedo, alleged to be the <.i>sudarium<./i> associated with Christi death, contains blood images similar in appearance to those on the Shroud, an can be historically traced to the 7th century. [Ricci, G., 1981, "The Holy Shroud," Centro Romano di Sindonologia: Rome, Italy, pp.137-143] In Figure 3 the equally scaled dorsal head wound marks on the two cloths are compared with one another. The similarity of these two complex patterns is evident enough to suggest that the two cloths were in contact with the same wounded body, presumably within the same short time period. Should further research reveal stronger relationship between these two relics, the accuracy of the 14th century date of the Shroud will be clearly doubtful, as the Cloth of Oviedo is considered at least 7th century." (Adler, A.D., 1996, "Updating Recent Studies on the Shroud of Turin," in Adler, A.D. & Crispino, D., ed., 2002, "The Orphaned Manuscript: A Gathering of Publications on the Shroud of Turin," EffatÓ Editrice: Cantalupa, Italy, pp.81-86, pp.82-83. http://www.sindone.info/ADLER.PDF). Feb [top]
4/02/2014 "THE RUSSIAN CROSS Everyone who has travelled in the Near East before the War will remember how, as soon as he crossed the frontier and found himself in Russia, he used to see everywhere on the churches, and on the iconostases within the churches, a form of the Cross to which he had not been accustomed in the West. There would be no sculptured images on the cross, though sometimes a painting. There were always in addition to the main cross- piece two other smaller ones, one above and one below. The top one of these represented the Title, so he was told, and the lower one stood for the foot-rest on which the feet of our Lord rested and to which they were nailed. And this lower bar was never straight but always inclined, the left side being higher than the right as one faced the cross. Naturally, one asked what might be the meaning of this slanting bar and why it was not straight, and one used to be told that it was because our Lord's legs were not of equal length, but that the left leg was longer than the right, so that when the soldiers came to nail Him to the Cross, the bar had to be slanted as otherwise it would not have been possible to nail the right foot. The explanation was given that our Blessed Lord in His infinite mercy and condescension had taken on Him a body which was that of a cripple, so that He always must have limped as He walked, and thus He was able the more fully to share in our troubles and take upon Him our infirmities. This form of the Cross is quite universal among all Russians and must date from the time of the national conversion. No one who remembers the intense conservatism of the Russian mind in such matters and how great schisms were brought about rather than that the smallest change in any [66] detail of ritual should be introduced, will believe that so universal a custom can have been introduced at any later date. Now the missionaries who originally converted the Russians, somewhere about 988, came from Constantinople, at that time still in union with the Holy See, and Russia remained exclusively subject to Constantinople for the next 300 years. It can, therefore, only have been from Constantinople that the form of the Cross we have described came to Russia, and it must have come there in all probability at some time earlier than A.D. 1000." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.65-66). 4/02/2014 "The same form of cross is well known also in Greece and in other countries which have depended religiously upon Constantinople, though it is not so universal there as in Russia itself. One remembers how, when the Latin Crusaders sacked Constantinople in 1204, Robert de Clari tells us that it had been the custom at the Church of St. Mary Blachernes for the Holy Shroud to be exposed every Friday, stretched upright so that all might see the figure of our Lord upon it.' Whether or not the Exposition took place so often in earlier centuries we know not, but such expositions were probably not infrequent, and it would have been a matter of common knowledge and talk how all could see the difference in the length of the legs, and drew their own inference from it. I would draw no conclusion and enter into no argument, for I recognize that the evidence is not conclusive." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, p.66). 4/02/2014 "But the coincidence seems sufficiently notable to deserve consideration, and for myself the conclusion is obvious. As I pass along some city street abroad, or enter into the Russian Church which is only a few yards from my home in London, and see the well-remembered form of the Russian Cross, the long series of historical events comes inevitably before my mind. I see first the Holy Shroud as I saw it and venerated it in the spring of 1931, and noted for myself how, since in that inverted shading it was hard to recognize the bending of the knee, one leg of the figure before me seemed indubitably to be longer than the other. Then in quick succession come the scenes at Constantinople and the looting of the Relic, and two or more centuries earlier, the arrival at the half-savage court of Vladimir of Russia of the Greek missionaries with their story of the limping Christ, who so loved us all that He took upon Him the body of a cripple in order that so He might enter more fully into our troubles and preach more effectively the Love of the Eternal Father for fallen humanity. Then Eudocia, and the bringing of the Relic to its home in the new Church of the Mother of God, and then, last of all, and most vividly, of 67 course, when Passiontide turns all our thoughts to the story of the Cross, the scene on Calvary, the mangled Body, scarcely dead, that was laid upon the linen that Joseph had bought for the purpose and covered reverently with the other part of the sheet-the left leg still bent and crooked, because for three long hours it had been fixed and nailed above the right, and now was stiff in death and could not easily be straightened." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.66-67). 4/02/2014 "THE BYZANTINE CURVE IN THE CRUCIFIX A learned correspondent in Italy, Padre Antonio Cojazzi, who had read in the <.i>Universe<./i> newspaper my speculations as given above on the origin of the form of the Russian Cross, sends me some further considerations on the subject. I translate his communication more or less without change, since I have not access to the books from which he quotes nor any personal expert knowledge of the subject with which he deals. But, once more, the contention he makes seems to me both reasonable and interesting. `On reading your article,' he writes, I consulted the work of G. K. Soukomski, <.i>Le Creml de Moscou, Paris, published by Nilsson without date, but within the last few years. It has 130 photographic pictures of that group of edifices which was called the Kremlin at Moscow and of the most precious of the objects it contained. Plate XIII shows the campanile of Ivan Veliki, with three cupolas near by. On the four summits there are four crosses each with the lower crossbar slanted. So, again, Plate XV, which shows the Church of the Twelve Apostles with similar crosses. The Church of St. Basil, in Plate XVIII, shows six domes surmounted by six crosses of the same form. 'Curiosity led me to consult further a beautiful book by Evelyn SandbergVavala, <.i>La croce dipinta italiana e l'iconografia della Passione, published at Verona in 1929. It reproduces the forms usually given to the Crucifix in the Middle Ages. In the Byzantine painted crosses after the year 1000, the most striking and noteworthy characteristic is the position assigned to Christ upon the Cross. In the crosses anterior to that date Christ is erect, rigid, and with His head looking straight to the front. But after the year 1000 this changes. Now the head is inclined to the right and the whole body is bent in what is known as the Byzantine curve, that is the head lies over towards the right shoulder and the body is curved sideways so that the convex side of the curve corresponds with the right side of the body, the concave with the left. Moreover, the feet are always nailed side by side at the same height, on to a horizontal enlargement of the cross, the knees are not bent but form part of the curve of the body. This `Byzantine [68] curve' becomes the established form at the beginning of the eleventh century. It is general in the East, but makes its way also into the West and is the recognized form in Italy throughout the early mediaeval period. This strange change in the accepted representation of the Crucifix begins as we have said with the year 1000 and is the more noteworthy when we remember the usually invariable tradition which governs Byzantine iconography." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.67-68). 4/02/2014 "The purpose of the change is explained by the author of the book we are quoting as being `to represent with a realism that is a little harsh and indeed almost brutal, the muscular tension and the convulsive agony of the death, and not the mere collapse of a body that is hanging lifeless and inert.' But he sees that the explanation is not satisfactory. He goes on, `But in fact the apparent realism is not very profound. The position is not natural and indeed not realizable.' If the body as depicted were straightened out and rendered rigid, the feet would not be at the same height and the legs would not be of the same length, but the left leg would always be found to be shorter than the right. That is the opposite of the Russian idea, which always held that it was the right leg which was the shorter. The whole question is excessively puzzling and confusing, because the relation of right and left is reversed upon the Shroud itself." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.67-68). 4/02/2014 "Now we come to the interesting suggestion of Padre Cojazzi : I should rather,' he says, ' offer the hypothesis that the Byzantine curve is a very realistic representation not of the agony of a dying man, but of the crucifixion of a man who was lame. The painter, convinced, perhaps, by the influence of what he saw upon the Shroud that the right leg of our Lord was shorter than the left gave the body this convex curve to the right so as to depict the result of nailing both feet to the support at the same height, in spite of the deformity of the Victim. He supposes the right foot to have been nailed first and then the left forcibly dragged down till it reached the same level, inevitably throwing out the body in a curve to the right and depressing the head in the same direction.'" (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, p.68). 4/02/2014 "If this be the true explanation of the Byzantine curve, the course of events will have been somewhat thus. Before the year 1000 the Russian missionaries, regarding the Shroud as a miraculous portrait, thought that the right leg was the shorter and accordingly slanted the representation of the support so that it should accommodate itself to this state of affairs. But at Constantinople itself, by the year 1000, if we may assume that date, this explanation was not accepted. There men were more learned and more skilled in artistic studies. They realized that the Shroud had enveloped [69] the Body of our Lord and therefore that the right and left of the images would be reversed, as in the reflection in a mirror. So it was the left leg that they concluded must have been the shorter. They did not agree that the executioners would have troubled to alter the support if indeed that would have been possible. It would have been inevitable then, they seem to have argued, that the right leg should have been dragged down and the whole body forced into a curve. It was the effort to express all this in a realistic fashion which led to the adoption of the ' Byzantine curve ' for the Crucifix from that time forward." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, pp.68-69). 4/02/2014 "It is an interesting explanation for a somewhat puzzling development in art, and I am glad to put it forward for the consideration of those who are more competent to judge of such subjects than myself. It is a pity, perhaps, to push an intriguing hypothesis too far, but one is inclined to ask whether, if this be the true explanation of the ' Byzantine curve,' it may also have led to that singular development in the ground plans of Gothic churches about the twelfth century which led to the chancel being built with its axis inclined to that of the nave, while sometimes, again, though more rarely, there is at the western end of the nave a porch which has a similar inclination. The inclination of the chancel is always to the left, and the traditional explanation, though not accepted by all, is that the intention was to express the bowing of our Lord's head on the Cross as recorded in the Gospel. One would not suggest any immediate influence of the Holy Shroud, but rather the attempt to express in stone ' the Byzantine curve ' as the accepted form for the Crucifix at that period." (Barnes, A.S., 1934, "The Holy Shroud of Turin," Burns Oates & Washbourne: London, p.69). 4/02/2014 "*The lame Christ of the Byzantines* Observation of the Shroud has influenced artists even in the representation of the crucifixion. After the year 1000, Jesus is not presented rigid and erect any more, but with his head bent to the right and the body distorted in what scholars define as a `Byzantine curve': in it the convexity always corresponds to the right side and the concavity to the left. The Byzantine curve is a highly realistic representation not of the agony of a dying man, but of the crucifixion of a man who was thought to be lame. The painter, influenced by the Shroud to believe that Jesus had His left leg shorter than His right, had to give to the [196] hips a convex curve to the right so as to make the feet nailed at the same height." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, pp.195-196). 4/02/2014 "The man of the Shroud appears, in fact, to have one leg shorter than the other. It is the left leg which has remained more curved on the cross compared to the other limb due to the superimposition of the left foot on the right one and remained thus as a result of <.i>rigor mortis<./i>. This detail has given rise to the legend of the `lame Jesus' that had an influence on the orthodox cross. It is represented having the lowest of the three horizontal arms inclined (differently at Byzantium and in Russia), as if on that cross there was, ideally, a man with a shorter leg." (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.196). 4/02/2014 "The tradition of a lame Christ conditions also the portrayals of the boy Jesus, notice the scholars Piero Cazzola and Maria Delfina Fusina, because the Redeemer was thought to have been lame from birth. Many icons of the Madonna, especially the older and more famous ones, portray her with the Holy Child in her arms and often the little feet that show out of the clothes are represented different from each other: one is normal, while the other is bent and shorter. Sometimes the Child Jesus is portrayed trying to hide one foot behind the other; more often he puts one leg on the other, superimposing the normal leg on the other, slightly bent, which appears underneath, with the sole turned with the flat while the other foot is always shown from the side, evidently influenced by the Shroud. The bent foot, which is shorter than the other one, clearly recalls the shape and position of the left foot in the Shroud, as seen from the sole in the dorsal image. In other icons the boy is seen standing barefooted and, while resting on his left foot, lifting the right to show the sole; or holding the right leg with his left hand, as if to show it. In some icons it is the Madonna herself who holds the malformed foot, almost as if to show the physical defect of her son. The prophecy of the old Simeon seems to be reflected on the mother's sad face while the boy appears to have a presentiment of the Passion. The canons superintending all the Byzantine iconography have codified the asymmetry of the limbs with a theological definition that `the feet of Christ, one horizontal and the other vertical, indicate His dual human and divine nature.'" (Petrosillo, O. & Marinelli, E., 1996, "The Enigma of the Shroud: A Challenge to Science," Scerri, L.J., transl., Publishers Enterprises Group: Malta, p.196). 20/02/2014 "Dr Christopher Bronk Ramsey took over from Prof Robert Hedges as Director of ORAU. Robert Hedges had led the lab for about 25 years and is now going to concentrate on other aspects of his research. Fortunately for ORAU, as he remains within the Research Lab for Archaeology, he will still be able to give valuable advice on radiocarbon dating, stable isotope research etc.. Christopher Bronk Ramsey has been the Deputy Director of ORAU for the last few years with particular responsibilities for the new AMS facility. Originally a physicist, he has a wide range of interests in radiocarbon, from archaeological applications (such as the chronology of the eastern Mediterranean) to GC-AMS and radiocarbon calibration (as the author of OxCal)." ("New director and deputy director for ORAU," Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit News, 1 October 2003). 20/02/2014 "Clifford Stoll is an astronomer by training and a computer security expert by accident. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Arizona in 1980 and has since then worked as an astronomer, scientific programmer and computer systems manager in various observatories and laboratories. He is now an astronomer at the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Massachusetts." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.ii). 20/02/2014 "And so it happened that on my second day at work, Dave wandered into my office, mumbling about a hiccup in the Unix accounting system. Someone must have used a few seconds of computing time without paying for it. The computer's books didn't quite balance; last month's bills of $2,387 showed a 75-cent shortfall. Now, an error of a few thousand dollars is obvious and 5 isn't hard to find. But errors in the pennies column arise from deeply buried problems, so finding these bugs is a natural test for a budding software wizard. Dave said that I ought to think about it. `First-degree robbery, huh?' I responded. `Figure it out, Cliff, and you'll amaze everyone,' Dave said. Well, this seemed like a fun toy, so I dug into the accounting program. I discovered our accounting software to be a patchwork of programs written by long-departed summer students. ... Over the years, a succession of bored summer students had written programs to analyse all this accounting information." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.4). 20/02/2014 "Our laboratory's computers connect to thousands of other systems over a dozen networks. Any of our scientists can log into our computer, and then connect to a distant computer. Once connected, they can log into the distant computer by entering an account name and password. In principle, the only thing protecting the networked computer is the password, since account names are easy to figure out. (How do you find account names? Just use a phone book-most people use their names on computers.)" (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.8). 20/02/2014 "Over lunch with Dave, I mentioned that Sventek was the only one connected when Dockmaster reported the break-in. He stared and said, 'Joe Sventek? He's in Cambridge. Cambridge, England. What's he doing back?' Turned out that Joe Sventek had been the laboratory's Unix guru, a software wizard who had built a dozen major programs over the past decade. Joe had left for England a year ago, leaving behind a glowing reputation throughout the California computer community. Dave couldn't believe Joe was back in town, since none of Joe's other friends had heard from him. 'He must have entered our computer from some network,' Dave said. `So you think Joe's responsible for this problem?' I asked Dave. `No way,' Dave replied. `Joe's a hacker of the old school. A smart, quick, capable programmer. Not one of those punks that have tarnished the word "hacker". In any case, Sventek wouldn't try to break into some Maryland computer. And if he did try, he'd succeed, without leaving any trace.'" (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, pp.8-9). 20/02/2014 "Wait-our home-brew software worked properly. Someone had added a new account without using it. Perhaps they didn't know about it. If someone had come in from the cold, they'd be unaware of our local wrinkles. Our system managers and operators knew this. Joe Sventek, even in England, surely would know. But what about someone from the outside-a hacker? The word hacker has two very different meanings. The people I knew who called themselves hackers were software wizards who managed to creatively program their way out of tight corners. They knew all the nooks and crannies of the operating system. Not dull software engineers who put in forty hours a week, but creative programmers who can't [12] leave the computer until the machine's satisfied. A hacker identifies with the computer, knowing it like a friend. Astronomers saw me that way. 'Cliff, he's not much of an astronomer, but what a computer hacker!' (The computer folks, of course, had a different view: 'Cliff's not much of a programmer, but what an astronomer!' At best, graduate school had taught me to keep both sides fooled.) But in common usage, a hacker is someone who breaks into computers.* In 1982, after a group of students used terminals, modems, and long distance telephone lines to break into computers in Los Alamos and the Columbia Medical Center, the computing people suddenly became aware of the vulnerability of our networked systems." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, pp.11-12). 20/02/2014 "Every few months, I'd hear a rumour about someone else's system being invaded; usually this was at universities, and it was often blamed on students or teenagers. 'Brilliant high school student cracks into top security computer centre.' Usually it was harmless and written off as some hacker's prank. Could the movie War Games actually happen-might some teenage hacker break into a Pentagon computer and start a war? I doubted it. Sure, it's easy to muck around computers at universities where no security was needed. After all, colleges seldom even lock the doors to their buildings. I imagined that military computers were a whole different story-they'd be as tightly secured as a military base. And even if you did get into a military computer, it's absurd to think you could start a war. Those things just aren't controlled by computers, I thought." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.12). 20/02/2014 "Our computers at Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory weren't especially secure, but we were required to keep outsiders away from them and make an effort to prevent their misuse. We weren't worried about someone hurting our computers, we just wanted to keep our funding agency, the Department of Energy, off our backs. If they wanted our computers painted green, then we'd order paintbrushes. But to make visiting scientists happy, we had several computer accounts for guests. With an account name of 'guest' and a password of 'guest', anyone could use the system to solve their problems, as long as they didn't use more than a few dollars of computing time. A hacker would have an easy time breaking into that account-it was wide open. This would hardly be much of a break-in, with time limited to one minute. But from that account, you could look around the system, read any public files, and see who was logged in. We felt the minor security risk was well worth the convenience." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, pp.12-13). 20/02/2014 "Mulling over the situation, I kept doubting that a hacker was fooling around in my system. Nobody's interested in particle physics. Hell most of our scientists would be delighted if anyone would read their papers. There's nothing special here to tempt a hacker-no snazzy supercomputer, no sexy trade secrets, no classified data. Indeed, the best part of working at Lawrence Berkeley Labs was the open, academic atmosphere. Fifty miles away, Lawrence Livermore Labs did classified work, developing nuclear bombs and Star Wars projects. Now, that might be a target for some hacker to break into. But with no connections to the outside, Livermore's computers can't be dialled into. Their classified data's protected by brute force: isolation. If someone did break into our system, what could they accomplish? They could read any public files. Most of our scientists set their data this way, so their collaborators can read it. Some of the systems software was public as well. Though we call this data public, an outsider shouldn't wander through it." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.13). 20/02/2014 "No, I wasn't worried about someone entering our computer as a guest and walking off with somebody's telephone number. My real concern centred on a much bigger problem: could a stranger become a super-user? To satisfy a hundred users at once, the computer's operating system splits the hardware resources much as an apartment house splits a building into many apartments. ... So our apartment houses need 15 superintendents, and our computers need system managers, or super-users. With a passkey, the apartment house superintendent can enter any room. From a privileged account, the system manager can read or modify any program or data on the computer. Privileged users bypass the operating system protections and have the full run of the computer. They need this power to maintain the systems software (`Fix the editor!'), to tune the operating system's performance (`Things are too slow today!'), and to let people use the computer (`Hey, give Barbara an account.'). ... But the super-user's licence lets you change any part of the system - there's no protection against the super-user's mistakes. Truly, the super-user is all-powerful: ... Different operating systems have various names for privileged accounts -super-user, root, system manager - but these accounts must always be jealously guarded against outsiders. What if an outside hacker became privileged on our system? For one thing, he could add new user accounts. ... He could read, write, or modify any information in the computer. No user's file would be protected from him when he operated from this privileged high ground. The system files, too, would be at his disposal ... He could even modify the accounting files to erase his own tracks." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, pp.14-15). 20/02/2014 "The lecturer on galactic structure droned on about gravitational waves. I was suddenly awake, aware of what was happening in our computer. I waited around for the question period, asked one token question, then grabbed my bike and started up the hill to Lawrence Berkeley Labs. A super-user hacker. Someone breaks into our system, finds the master keys, grants himself privileges, and becomes a super-user hacker. Who? How? From where? And, mostly, why?" (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.16). 20/02/2014 "I needed no security clearance to work in the Berkeley Lab-there's no classified research, not a military contract in sight. Livermore, on the other hand, is a centre for designing nuclear bombs and Star Wars laser beams. Hardly the place for a long-haired ex-hippie. While my Berkeley Lab survived on meagre scientific grants and unreliable university funding, Livermore constantly expanded. Ever since Teller designed the H- bomb, Livermore's classified research has never been short of funds. Berkeley no longer has huge military contracts, yet openness has its rewards. As pure scientists, we're encouraged to research any curious phenomena, and can always publish our results." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.17). 20/02/2014 "While we didn't have the number-crunching power of Livermore, our computers were no slouches. Our Vax computers were speedy, easy to use, and popular among physicists. We didn't have to invent our own operating systems, since we bought Digital's VMS operating system, and grabbed Unix from campus. As an open lab, our computers could be networked anywhere, and we supported scientists from around the world. When problems developed in the middle of the night, I just dialled the LBL computer from my home-no need to bicycle into work when a phone call might solve it." (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, p.18). 20/02/2014 "But there I was, bicycling up to work, wondering if some hacker was in our system. This just might explain some of my accounting problems. If some outsider had picked the locks on our Unix operating system and acquired super-user privileges, he'd have the power to selectively erase the accounting records. And, worse, he could use our network connections to attack other computers. I ducked my bike into a corner and jogged over to the cubicle maze. By now it was well past five, and the ordinary [19] folks were at home. How could I tell if someone was hacking inside our system? Well, we could just send an electronic mail message to the suspicious account, saying something like, `Hey, are you the real Joe Sventek?' Or we could disable Joe's account, and see if our troubles ended. ... The next morning, I eagerly explained my suspicions about a hacker to Dave Cleveland, 'I'll bet you cookies to doughnuts it's a hacker.' Dave sat back, closed his eyes, and whispered, 'Yep, cookies for sure.' His mental acrobatics were almost palpable. Dave managed his Unix system with a laid-back style. Since he competed for scientists with the VMS systems, he had never screwed down the security bolts on his system, figuring that the physicists would object and take their business elsewhere. By trusting his users, he ran an open system and devoted his time to improving their software, instead of building locks. Was someone betraying his trust?" (Stoll, C., 1989, "The Cuckoo's Egg Tracking a Spy through the Maze of Computer Espionage," Pan: London, reprinted, 1991, pp.18-19). 22/02/2014 "A member of the audience [of the British Society for the Turin Shroud] then raised the question whether the laboratories had been in contact with each other during the test phase. After categorically denying it at first, Tite admitted that there had probably been leaks contrary to the agreement, and in the ensuing unrest in the hall he conceded that the so-called blind test too was really no blind test! Surely he must have known this already before the sampling, when he was supposedly unable to organize the procurement of identical fabrics. Why then stage the whole show with the secret packing of the samples in the containers away from the public eye? What purpose could such play-acting have served? There is no reasonable answer to this question. The responsibility for the exchange of information among the laboratories, which Tite admits to, also rests on his shoulders. He was [70] the guarantor, the referee so to speak, who was supposed to see that the agreed experimental procedure was exactly adhered to. In the event it was as if no agreement were followed at all." (Kersten, H. & Gruber, E.R., 1994, "The Jesus Conspiracy: The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection," Element Books: Shaftesbury UK, Reprinted, 1995, pp.69-70). 28/02/2014 "Pope Francis has drawn an explicit link between Christ and the ghostly image imprinted on the Turin Shroud but stopped short of declaring the holy icon the true burial cloth of Jesus. Francis made his first remarks on the mysterious cloth since being elected Pope in a special video message as the shroud was shown live on television for only the second time in its history. ... Francis referred to the 14ft-long strip of sepia fabric, which is imprinted with the face and body of a bearded man, as `the Holy Shroud' and asked: `How is it that the faithful, like you, pause before this icon of a man scourged and crucified? It is because the Man of the Shroud invites us to contemplate Jesus of Nazareth.'" ("Pope Francis links Turin Shroud to Jesus Christ as cloth is shown on television for Easter," Nick Squires, Rome, The Telegraph 30 Mar 2013). 28/02/2014 "Dismissing skeptics on Sunday when he visited the Shroud of Turin, Pope Benedict XVI said the burial cloth was none other than the same robe that once 'wrapped the remains' of Jesus Christ., Pope Benedict described the shroud, which allegedly bears blood stains and the facial imprint of a long-haired, bearded man, as an icon that once `wrapped the remains of a crucified man in full correspondence with what the Gospels tell us of Jesus.' While Pope Benedict joins the ranks of those who believe the sepia-colored shroud is the burial cloth of Jesus Christ, skeptics dismiss it as an ingenious medieval forgery that radiocarbon testing has dated about 800 years old." ("Pope Benedict says Shroud of Turin authentic burial robe of Jesus," Nick Squires, Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 2010). 28/02/2014 "The Vatican, which owns the linen cloth, has in the past tiptoed around the issue, describing it as a potent symbol of Jesus Christ's suffering but never asserting outright its authenticity. Pope John Paul II visited the Shroud when it last went on public display in 1998, but he said the Catholic Church had `no specific competence' to pronounce on its authenticity and urged further scientific analysis. Benedict was much less equivocal on Sunday when he prayed in front of the cloth at St. John the Baptist Cathedral in Turin, Italy, saying afterwards in a `meditation' that it was `an icon written in blood; the blood of a man who was whipped, crowned with thorns, crucified, and injured on his right side.'" ("Pope Benedict says Shroud of Turin authentic burial robe of Jesus," Nick Squires, Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 2010). 28/02/2014 "The shroud went on public display April 10 for the first time in a decade. The public viewing ends later this month, by which time nearly 2 million pilgrims and curious tourists are expected to have filed past it. The 14- foot-long, 3.5-foot-wide cloth is kept in a bulletproof, climate-controlled case in the royal chapel of Turin's cathedral. It bears the imprint of an apparently crucified man. A church fire in 1997 nearly destroyed the shroud." ("Pope Benedict says Shroud of Turin authentic burial robe of Jesus," Nick Squires, Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 2010). 28/02/2014 "New research claims to show authenticity In November, a researcher in the Vatican's secret archives claimed that using computer enhancement she found the words `Jesus Nazarene' on the shroud. Historian Barbara Frale said computer analysis of photographs of the shroud revealed the words written extremely faint in Greek, Aramaic, and Latin. Dr. Frale asserts in a new book, `The Shroud of Jesus the Nazarene,' that it was written by low-ranking Roman officials or mortuary clerks on a scroll or piece of papyrus to identify the corpse. Such a document would have enabled the relatives of a dead person to retrieve a body from a communal morgue, she suggested. It would have been attached to the corpse with a flour-based glue and the ink could have seeped through into the cloth below, leaving a faint imprint. The hidden text was, in effect, the `burial certificate' of Jesus, Frale told Italian daily newspaper Corriere della Sera in November. Radiocarbon dating raises doubts But her claims were contested by scholars who said that radiocarbon dating tests in 1988 showed the shroud to be a medieval forgery produced sometime in the 13th or 14th century. `People work on grainy photos and think they see things,' Antonio Lombatti, an Italian historian who has written books about the shroud, also told Corriere della Sera. `It's all the result of imagination and computer software.' Dr. Lombatti rejected the idea that authorities would go to the trouble of tagging the body of a crucified man. The carbon dating tests have been vigorously contested by some scholars, who say they were skewed because the test samples from the cloth could have come from later restoration efforts. The shroud was discovered in the French city of Troyes [sic], southeast of Paris, in the mid-14th century." ("Pope Benedict says Shroud of Turin authentic burial robe of Jesus," Nick Squires, Christian Science Monitor, May 3, 2010).

[top]


Copyright © 2014, by Stephen E. Jones. All rights reserved. These my quotes may be used
for non-commercial purposes only and may not be used in a book, ebook, CD, DVD, or any other
medium except the Internet, without my written permission. If used on the Internet, a link back
to this page would be appreciated.
Created: 1 January, 2014. Updated: 28 February, 2014.