View Active Topics          View Your Posts          Latest 100 Topics          Switch to Mobile

New Shroud of Turin Special on History Channel

Discussions Religion and Theology, Scriptures, Bible Debate, etc.

Re: New Shroud of Turin Special on History Channel

Postby ProfWag » 23 Jul 2011, 04:16

Craig Browning wrote:
ProfWag wrote:
NetMarissa wrote:I'm doing a research paper for my religious studies class and thought that this might be a good reference. If anyone can help me out, it would be super appreciated! Thanks, everyone! =)

Obviously you can do what you want, and obviously every college professor is different, but most of us would not accept a History Channel reference in a research paper...

While I can understand one reason as to why that would be, I can't fully wrap my head around such an attitude (no pun intended); a resource and especially a cited and studied resource is a resource nonetheless. Does this go for NatGeo as well?

Ok... I did see some silliness on the Green network this morning about the validity of Vampires, Where (?) Wolves, etc. so I can see why such sources would be questionable at best and yet, depending on how that reference were used it could very well be viable.

Sorry, but it sounds as if certain facets of the education world are still looking down on Television when it comes to being a viable source/resource. I've found tons of very credible material on the History/TLC networks as well as NatGeo (two of my favorite networks I should add). In fact the material found in such programs prompted me to get books and manuscripts mentioned in these articles so I could take a deeper look at things which has included some interesting correspondence with show principles. So I'm quite lost as to why such material would no longer be weighed or even remotely seen as credible now days.

AS TO THE SHROUD. . . I believe it was Lawrence Gardner that brings up the whole Templar connection to the artifact in BLOODLINE OF THE HOLY GRAIL (quite a good read actually).

Perhaps I need to clarify the resource thing. If the source is cited as "Dr. John Smith, Archeologist at the University of Denver, said on a History Channel Documentary..." well, that's one thing. but if the source is simply "according to History Channel's program on the Shroud of Turin, the shroud is a 600 year old forgery..." then that's what I wouldn't accept. There is virtually no difference in citing that show in and of itself as there is citing Unsolved Mysteries, Penn & Teller's Bullsh!t, or one of Winston's youtube videos. The source should be credible and verifiable.
I love the History Channel, NatGeo, TLC, etc. as well, but the issue at hand is that many/most of the stories are presented as entertainment rather than educational.
User avatar
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: New Shroud of Turin Special on History Channel

Postby Craig Browning » 24 Jul 2011, 02:43

I can accept that. . . guess I was seeing things in how I'd cite such material vs. the "less vested" approach :twisted:
User avatar
Craig Browning
Posts: 1526
Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 05:20
Location: Northampton, MA

Re: New Shroud of Turin Special on History Channel

Postby Scepcop » 18 Mar 2014, 22:55

The link to that History Channel special was taken down. But it's back up now. Here is the new link.

It's 90 minutes and very fascinating and mind blowing. If you didn't believe in it before, it will make a believer out of you. All the scientists and experts in it admitted that they were baffled about how the image was formed on the Shroud of Turin, after they ruled out all conventional explanations. Even researchers that have studied the shroud for decades concluded the same, that it is totally inexplicable. They even said that in a courtroom trial, the shroud would be sufficient to prove the existence and resurrection of Jesus. These are skeptical non-religious scientists and researchers that are saying this.

The skeptics can't win on this one, because many serious skeptical scientists themselves have ruled out all conventional explanations for how the image on the shroud was produced, and cannot replicate it themselves.

Moreover, most scientists have retracted their position that the 1988 carbon dating of bits of the corner of the shroud proved that it was a forgery from the Middle Ages. The tests were flawed and the samples were contaminated because they were taken from a corner of the shroud that was restored with cloth from the Middle Ages. This was proven scientifically and many skeptics have accepted it. The documentaries go into detail about it.

This is definitely a true mystery that can be construed as hard evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. I've seen many other documentaries on the shroud as well, and they all say the same thing after interviewing many top scientists and researchers. Besides the History Channel special, the BBC and Discovery Channel documentaries concluded similarly.

Plus, basic logic infers that if the shroud image were of a man other than Jesus, then the church would not have guarded it so closely for so many centuries. So there must be a reason for them to have kept it so long as a sacred treasure. It doesn't make sense that they would do that if it were a hoax.

Either way, this is truly inexplicable, and all the top experts who have investigated the shroud seem to be in concurrence on it. See the documentaries below. They will make a believer out of you for sure.

The BEST documentary on the Shroud of Turin

The Real Face of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin (History Channel)

Unwrapping the Shroud of Turin: The New Evidence (Discovery Channel)

BBC investigation into the Shroud of Turin

Lecture by Paul Bromley on the Shroud of Turin, who has studied it for decades. He gives no-nonsense facts about it such as what we know for sure about how it was not made, etc.

For more info, see these websites:

Shroud of Turin Website

Shroud of Turin Blog

Turin Shroud Center of Colorado

Scientific paper on the Shroud
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 3259
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29


Return to Religion / Theology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest