Trying to capture all the topological relief of facial features onto a cloth mantle can be quite tricky, as the Pontiff demonstrates.
Never mind. We of the contact-imprinting school of Shroudology will press on regardless (no pun intended).
Here's a screen grab of the article from this morning's Express:
PS: Couldn't resist posting this one. However, I'm still working on, and still adding to yesterday's posting, protesting at the new orthodoxy that would have us regard gluten intolerance as an autoimmune disease.
Addendum, still Thursday am (just)
Speaking of contact imprints, this comment appeared on Dan Porter's shroudstory site this morning from Hugh Farey in which he throws us a challenge to explain the faintness and other features of the Lier copy (1516) of the Turin Shroud. Here first is the item in question from a recent Pam Moon pdf:
|Lier copy of the Shroud|
- November 6, 2014 at 4:23 am
Charles Freeman, still fending off criticism of his "History Today" article, some of it from me, is now attempting to turn the tables, so to speak, and get me to defend my position on the TS image (despite the fact that all of it is "thinking aloud" on blog sites, with no attempt (as yet) to go public (though that might change in the weeks and months to come).
Here's his comment, followed by my response.
November 6, 2014 at 11:35 am
November 6, 2014 at 1:10 pm
And after all that, here's what I get as a reply, to which I say "No (further) comment".
November 6, 2014 at 4:20 pm
Why no further comment? Because there's no point discussing the TS with someone who fails to appreciate that the TS blood and body image are two entirely different things. The blood can be painted on, whether with real blood, a blood fraction or an artist's pigment. The blood does not have the curious properties, like being a negative image. But the body image IS a negative, and does not need to have been an applied pigment, and in all probability was not.
Charles Freeman seems to be blissfully unaware of 30 and more years of scientific investigation, not all of it first class admittedly, but there's enough evidence to show that the TS body image is like no other. To suggest it's what's left when paint has flaked off, merely to sustain a fanciful delusion that it started as paint, is just plain silly. I'm talking here needless to say about body image, not "blood", which might well be paint. But one cannot view the TS as being all paint, just because the blood may fit that description.
Does Freeman seriously imagine that the Lirey Pilgrim's badge circa1355 would have been minted to commemorate the first known public display of what he dismisses as a unremarkable length of paint-daubed linen?
PS Here are contact prints off a UK 2p coin, needed to make a point elsewhere.