Hello again. It’s almost 3 years since I last posted to this site. It was set up in March 2012, shortly after I set out to discover means by which the Turin Shroud’s ‘enigmatic’ body image could or might have been produced as a medieval ‘forgery’. (More politely, a modelling of what Joseph of Arimathea’s ‘fine linen’ with a body imprint of Jesus might have looked like 13 centuries later).
Why this site, separate/in addition to my main Shroud site? Answer: the latter was intended to report, possibly for the first time, day-to-day, week-by-week progress in real time of an experimental research project. But when I started to attract flak on Dan Porter’s now discontinued shroudstory site for my second model (the so-called “scorch” hypothesis) I decided a separate site was needed to deal with the more disputatious aspects. In fact there were only 8 postings to this site, but one or two I still consider to have made useful points that will be returned to in future postings here (since the same old pseudoscientific mantra continue to be wheeled out, notably on the Stephen E.Jones site from which this investigator is repeatedly stated to be ‘permanently banned’ and his ideas not fit for the slightest mention. How’s that for Jones’s unique brand of , let’s not mince our words, religious bigotry (which wouldn’t be so bad were it not accompanied by his cavalier treatment of the science, full of short cuts, blind spots, over-simplifications etc etc.).
First, however, it’s necessary to flag up here the state of progress with this researcher’s latest and I believe FINAL model for the Turin Shroud. I refer to the two step thermal imprinting model that uses a combination of WHITE FLOUR and VEGETABLE OIL to imprint off a real live human subject, followed by THERMAL DEVELOPMENT of the imprint by oven-roasting. (That’s as distinct from the hot metal templates used previously to scorch imprints directly in single step mode, now discarded, though having earned their keep in many useful respects (about which more later).
Here in photos are the 10 or so easy steps for producing an image that matches up closely to many, indeed most of the pecuiar characteristics of that image in its argon-filled glass display case in Turin.
Finally, here’s the appearance of the before-and-after washing images in the 3D-rendering program, ImageJ:
As stated many, many times before, 3D properties are by no mean unique to the Shroud image. They are shown by any imprint that has gradations of image density (the software simply elevates image density to height on an imaginary third dimension (i.e. ‘height’ above the xy plane, the ‘z axis’). Imprints, indeed simple printed images like flags etc with no 3D history respond to ImageJ. There should be no mystique re apparent 3D properties, and no justification for the frequently encountered references in sindonology to the image having “3D-encoded” information as if it were a computer program waiting to be decoded. It’s simply a contact imprint that captured certain features of the relief more than others during the imprinting proocess, due to factors like planarity as well as height. (Planariry , i.e. level horizontal surface, favours retention of sprinkled flour in the present model).
More to follow.