00:01.32
archpodnet
Hello and welcome back to the pseudo archeology podcast episode None the shroud of Turin. So last. Part there we were talking about the setup for the shroud and how I came into kind of talking about it and my trip on an airplane with a woman who was trying to convince me that the shroud was real. Let's take a minute and talk about the the nuts and bolts of the shroud and the history of the shroud. So what is the shroud. As we established before the shroud of turin is supposed to be specifically the burial shroud of Jesus but it's made out of flax which is linen right? and it's it's long. It's like fifteen feet long by about four feet wide and that's because it goes over both sides of the body. Right? I didn't know that until recently but it so that's why it's so long so it covers like if you're laying on the table. You put the the sheet down none you put the body on it and then you fold it over the top so it has an imprint of the front of the body and the rear of the body and of course is about four feet wide so you have enough room for the body itself. Um, on on this There's an image right? that ah, that's purportedly of Jesus. It's very light. It's a very It's a very thin image. You can kind of almost that you it's one of those you can almost miss and unless you look real close and if you look real close. You could see it. And honestly you can see it much better as a photo negative. None of the big kind of aha moments for the shroud was I believe in the it was in the none century when early photography they took a photo negative of the shroud and they're like wow because it comes out a lot better then. And besides there being this image of the body and and the body's just laying their um hands kind of crossed in front. Ah, it also has what are purported to be bloodstains at the crucifixion points and looking more closely. The image of the man if you measure him is six feet tall huh Six feet tall 33 a d I don't know you know what I'm saying and the weave of the flax is in a style that's super common in the thirteen hundreds and super not common at all. Slash didn't exist in the early years a d so just with the setup you get everything right? there. It's a well It's a fake but let's look at the history.

02:42.88
archpodnet
Just in case, you don't believe me so there is no mention of the fake until it first came up in France in 1354 isn't that cool 1354 that's a long time ago. This is old um and a couple years after that in 1389 it was called a fake the people in the thirteen hundreds thought it was a fake and also it was from a time when a lot of religious icons were being you guessed it faked because. Charlatans in the past I I don't mean to hurt your feelings about your past ancestors but well they lied just as much as we do so and that's what makes it so cool right? that that this this fake it. Is again, none encountered in the 1350 s it's called out as a fake in None but people won't go for it how many times have you heard this in the pseudo archeology world right? You know Atlantis or any of the others where it is initially thought of as a fake but it's kind of. brought back and brought back and brought back again it's magical thinking because people want it to be true. Anyway, they keep it around time goes on in 1532 it's damaged in a fire in France again, it's in France during this during all these early early times and it's repaired by nuns. In the 1530 s ah in 1578. It's moved from France to a cathedral built specially for it in turin italy so since fifteen seventy eight it's been in this cathedral in turin italy so hence the name shroud of Turin. And ever since then what is that none 16 so for for over 400 years the church has done the same dog and pony show where they put it on display for a little bit and then they hide it and then they put it on display for a little bit and then they hide it you know and that has literally been going on for 400 years it's also been. Repaired every so often. So the initial fire damage and that's why when you look at the shroud if you if you see an image of it. There's these little triangular like like burn parts. You'll see it and you can tell the fire damage happened when the shroud was folded up right? It was like it was folded up in like None corner got burned. Um. So it's repaired in sixty ninety four s repaired it in 1868 and actually in 2002 they took off all the old repairs and they really kind of jazzed it up for the for the modern age right? They they basically brought it back down to original because.

05:30.10
archpodnet
I think in the the the ethos of today you know we prefer things not to be overly repaired or you know when it comes to like a painting or or anything like that we prefer just for it to show its natural wear and tear. So. That's what they did. Now in terms of the carbon None date that was done in 1988 and none I can't believe the church agreed to do this, you know because this is like this is the put up or shut up moment and you guys I didn't. No I knew had been dated but I didn't know how well it was dated because it was dated great in terms of the technology used in terms of the sort of double blind testing used. They did a fan. Tastic job in 1988 ah with the dating I wish my carbon 14 dates for my archeological sites were dated as well as they dated the shroud I'm telling you they spared no expense. They left no stone unturned they did. Ah. Excellent job. What do I mean by that. So none they did a s stating which is the ah more precise sort of better method. We don't need to get into carbon 14 day methods but Ams Ams stands for accelerator mass spectrometry. And what it gets you is just a is is a is a better more specific narrower date which is what you always want so what these guys did they basically they came in in 88 they got a linen specialist to make sure they took a. Original piece of the shroud and a linen specialist is going to know that in like 2 seconds right like which part is new and which part has been repaired. They are not going to mess that up trust me and I know people who specialize in different kinds of artifacts in the archeological world and and a specialist in that. Is not going to screw up something that easy. So my point there being that the the person who I talked to on the plane right? trying to tell me that ah well they dated one of the repair parts that is utterly false so the specialist picks the special part. To cut out and they allowed it they because you have to cut out a piece carbon fourteen only works with with an actual piece of the object that you're dating and and that piece you will burn up it. It burns up into nothingness and you get the date. The carbon 14 is basically released in the burning process. So.

08:13.69
archpodnet
The the linen specialist picks it and then they send they split it up in the thirds and they send three separate labs in the three separate countries. Ah each a piece of the shroud. It is not called the shro. It's just labeled like sample b. You know it has. There's meaning there is no way that the that the lab they send it to even knows what it is they just labs get this stuff all the time so they're just going to date it go on with it good to go um, dates come back. They all line up and it dates from between. None to None a d and that range what is that? let's see 1360 s is none range. That's very typical in in archeology right? And the way we report these is that range from None to 1390 what we're saying is we can tell with a 95% accuracy that that piece dates to that ah area of time and of course right there you see what the pseudor archeologists are going to say they're going to be like oh 95%. What about the magical None and you guys in reality that never happens science just covers its ass again and again and again and I mean that in a very positive sense meaning they say 95% but that's like at least meaning it's usually much better and shockingly enough. The dates of none to 1390 hey the shroud was none reported historically in 1354 right in the middle of these dates. So everything lines up everything lines up. They even had a guy who was a specialist in. Art of that time and he looked at it and just you know hey what do you think of the image of Jesus here based on the stylistic aspects of it and he guessed he's like about None give or take he guessed a tick young but still it shows like right in there that is. Excellent data and the Scott stylistic guy knows we talk about meaning that when you look at that face of Jesus you know that's that's a you quote unquote emblazoned on there. It wasn't emblazoned ah that it is of that time. Absolutely so everything comes together right? So and stylistic will tell you a lot because art styles change over time when you look at things in your everyday life. You know you can you can tell if a car is from the 1980 s or the twenty ten s based on its style right? You can tell if clothing is from certain eras based on its style and you can't get it to the year but yeah

10:55.86
archpodnet
Can get it to a decade or two you know and as you go back in time. It gets a little more broad so that's how this ah the the guy who was a specialist in art of that time. That's that's ah how he knows of course when this data comes out. Massive excuses immediately from the church and from others they're all pissed right? They double down on their belief and their belief is wrong. So they go with the the thing that the woman told me on the plane. That's their number one? Oh well, they dated a repaired piece. They. Didn't it's long been proven false. The other thing is it was contaminated some way like like the oils from the skin of somebody. You know they contaminated the sample now in reality that kind of stuff can happen. But not to this degree like if you have like a teeny bit of contamination and they would have dealt with that in the lab I'm telling you you guys. So it's it's a non issue but but let's say it doesn't because again I've sent samples to a lab I know how they clean stuff beforehand you know I'm I I know this world. And so this is a non-issue but let's let's say it was it wouldn't mess up your date by like 1300 years and you would need so much contamination. It would be obvious it would be like the piece of linen would be encased in like a rock of dirt ha. And then finally they also have this like carbon monoxide thing where they're like ah the fires over time. There was so much carbon monoxide in the air that that it that it messed up the the carbon 14 content of the shroud and that is just absolutely untrue. It don't work that way. And this stuff is very classically what pseudo archeologists do they take kind of half truths and push them. You know so it puts the onus on me where I have to describe to you guys like like what the real deal is you know it's it's a great trick for them to be like oh well, it was contaminated. Isn't it true Kin Kela that samples can be ta contaminated but I have to take a along to be like well yes you know they can be contaminated but in realitys snow big deal then then did they just go see see. He's wrong. It's like now now I'm right. Because I know science. You know that thing that works you know that thing that gives you real dates. Yeah, that thing her.

13:33.34
archpodnet
When we get back How the shroud was actually made.