Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Science Does Not Care's avatar

I have a different question about the psychology of human belief: why are most people deliberately selective about how and when they embrace belief as valid, and when they at least claim to support rational objectivity, aka "science", over belief?

To provide a deliberately provocative example, why do so many American liberals dismiss Christian theology, including relics like the shroud, and its utility as a foundation for morality and politics, but then embrace Native American religion and all their associated totems, and eagerly create laws and policies in accordance with those animist beliefs? Is this an expression of more fundamental human desire for political advantage, or just an expression of typically irrational and inconsistent human psychology?

Expand full comment
Rehrl's avatar

The sample was not from the main part of the cloth it was taken from a repaired part of the shroud there’s photographic evidence to it. So you have a whole article stating the shroud is from the 14th century and therefore is not the burial cloth of Jesus and you sight ONE piece of evidence for it being a fraud? How about the fact that no one can come up with an explanation on how the image was formed? The best anyone has come to explain it was the use of some 1400 lasers being set off at the same time in a split second? I’m not a scientist but I would think that might be a hard thing to do in the 1300’s(note the sarcasm)…how about the fact that the blood(yes it’s real blood) seaps through to the back of the cloth yet the image is only a few hairs deep? Meaning that the blood was there first then the image after…why would a forger go through all that trouble? Why is there blood on the wrist and not on the hands? All images of Christ show the nails through the hands in paintings in that era…why and how would a forger know to put the nails through the wrists? How about the new evidence to the date of the shroud that just came out in 2024 dating it back to the first century? It’s truly amazing that on one side you have all this evidence to its authenticity being about 10 feet high and on the side of it being a fake you have one piece of evidence that’s about a centimeter high.

Expand full comment
37 more comments...

No posts