tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post5954563403286902612..comments2023-10-19T04:59:08.088-07:00Comments on science buzz: The Turin Shroud is clearly a medieval fake - albeit a very clever one. What more is there to say?sciencebodhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-9615493490721016652015-02-14T03:31:00.827-08:002015-02-14T03:31:00.827-08:0011:00 London time
This posting has just this minu...11:00 London time<br /><br />This posting has just this minute appeared on shroudstory.com<br /><br />http://shroudstory.com/2015/02/14/on-deaf-ears-here/<br /><br />At present, I have 125 hits, and am still at the top of Page 2 Google listings for (turin shroud medieval fake).<br /><br />Now, received wisdom would have us believe that Google rankings are based mainly on links, on having one's words quoted elsewhere with links to one's sites.<br /><br />Yet after some 3 years of posting, and having dozens, yes dozens of my postings highlighted "over there", I have actually gone down in the rankings in the last year or so, not up.<br /><br />Why? Well,today's developments give a clue. It's the choice of one's key words/labels that are crucial. "Medieval fake" is in fact a 'red flag' category, one that is 'suggested' by Google as soon as one enters (turin shroud). By attaching this posting to that category I now have visibility that may help to trigger positive feedback, the kind that has made my "heavy CO2" posting my most visited (currently some 20 per day).<br /><br />Dan Porter is trying to portray me right now as a loner, one who wants to cut himself off, play by himself.<br /><br />Not true. I've wanted interaction across the entire internet, but one thing's for certain. Despite his site being held up as the major Shroud forum in terms of free-flowing comment, current developments etc, coverage by Dan Porter fails to translate into hits and visitors to one's own site, or one's search engine rankings. Yes, it's something I've addressed previously and heard Dan Porter's response that I'm failing to do this or that (make better use of social media sites etc).<br /><br />But here's a thought. On the occasions when you have seen or read media reports the latest developments re the Shroud, when has there ever been a mention of what has been said on Porter's site, or who has said it? <br /><br />Answer: I cannot recall a single instance in 3 years when that has happened. If the truth be told it is Dan Porter with a relatively small coterie of commenters who "plays alone". Sure, he may have thousands of folk a day reading his site, but if they never place a comment, and never refer to shroudstory.com in the mainstream media, then he and his site are for all intents and purposes near-invisible where public opinion is concerned, whether sceptical or pro-authenticity. I for one do not wish that fate for my site,i.e. to dwell in obscurity, and will constantly try new approaches. One of them right now is to place Dan Porter's site lower down my scale of priorities, and try to analyse exactly what it is that prevents it reaching lift-off. I already have a germ of an idea. It's to do with what the philosophers call analysis and synthesis. Synthesis operates at a higher level than analysis. Porter's site is all analysis, and often very sterile and superficial analysis at that, with NO synthesis, no big idea, no take-away message.sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-55098331921769168092015-02-14T02:12:51.167-08:002015-02-14T02:12:51.167-08:00This is the image in the sciencebuzz image archive...This is the image in the sciencebuzz image archive that caused such a frisson on shroudstory.com, resulting in its deletion:<br /><br />https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-wd3HxOhQmJc/VNuQpppdSyI/AAAAAAAAESA/YIQEwd19AU8/w140-h106-p/74219_54_news_hub_68003_588x448%2Blabelled.jpg<br /><br />Why did I use it? Your host here was in full image-only mode (see rationale in main posting) and was challenged to work in Kim Kardashian.<br /><br />Well, it didn't take long to find the image of that celebrated rear chassis in Google archives, whose source was impeccable: first on the front cover of "Paper", an up-market NY-based glossy magazine, $10 per issue, which was then picked up the whole world over, including my own country's tabloid press. I used the image from the Daily Mail, a change from "Obese mother of 13 drawing £55,000 a year in State benefits accuses lover of watering her gin".<br /><br />Naturally I did not post it for vicarious thrills only. There was a message attached that was of huge relevance to the Turin Shroud, conveying as it did my preferred explanation for the rationale of the TS as a putative sweat imprint (simulated rather than real if, as I suspect, a contact-scorch from a heated metal template) modelled on the legend of Veil of Veronica.<br /><br />Enjoy (the message that is - what did you think I meant?)sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4111782305190930044.post-88532393241106952222015-02-14T01:02:20.973-08:002015-02-14T01:02:20.973-08:00Time maybe to prime the pumps on my own comments!
...Time maybe to prime the pumps on my own comments!<br /><br />This posting has been attracting more hits in its first 24 hours than is customary. Why is that I wonder, given it's not been picked up on another site, at least not that I'm aware of? <br /><br />Methinks there may be a simple explanation. Up till now I've been reluctant to use "medieval fake" as a key word/label, but finally decided to take the plunge, in view of the major convergence between my thinking and that of Luigi Garlaschelli etc al.<br /><br />When I googled (Turin Shroud medieval fake) I found this paper at the top of Page 2 returns. My posts usually languish well down listings, especially of (Turin Shroud)on its own. So I've probably got those two extra terms and the hardening of opinion to thank for added visibility and hopefully new visitors to this site.How nice it would be if just a few left a comment. It doesn't need to be flattering!<br /><br />Plans for the future. I briefly linked to two other recent postings on shroudstory.com where I have focused on the failure of the iconic "double man" image to be seen prior to 1355, which I consider to be pretty damning for authenticity.<br /><br />I may make one or two extra postings here similar to this one, basically gift-wrapping what I have posted elsewhere as comments, including responses (relevant ones that is) where they help "tell a story". sciencebodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12051016731274875332noreply@blogger.com