On May 8, 7:22 pm, Rolf R <R1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> In article
> <af89533f-612f-47e0-8939-94d818bd4...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
>
>
> Mam...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > On May 7, 12:02 pm, Rolf R <R1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <42671d64-ad59-4082-bfe8-7d89517bf...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>
> > > abra.rice...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> > > > El Sagrado Sudario de Turin es y se queda un enigma, ; esto a sido
> > > > confirmado tambien **** el director del laboratorio mas im****tante
de=
> > > > los tr=E9s que han analizado el tejido con el carbono 14. El
directo=
r
> > > > admiti=F2 un grave error en la datati=F2n.
> > > > Lo unico medio que el hombre tiene para resolver el enigma es
> > > > reconocer que efectivamente en aquel Sagrado Lino occuri=F2 algo
de
> > > > inexplicable : la Resurrecci=F2n de Cristo.
>
> > > > Sitio web :
http://digilander.libero.it/antoniobragadin/mystery.=
htm
> > > > Email : ricercapap....@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > Est=E1s muy atrasado en la noticia. Ya est=E1 claro que: El sudario
de=
Tur=EDn
> > > fue PINTADO en el siglo XIII. Que el pintor es casi seguro fue
Leonard=
o
> > > da Vinci cuyo rostro aparece en el mismo. Que da Vince era el
=FAnico =
que
> > > pod=EDa haber hecho esa imagen en negativo y se sabe d=F3nde =E9l
> > > experimentaba hacer esas im=E1genes en negativo. Que la imagen no
pued=
e
> > > haber sido de un hombre real, orque la parte que muestra la espalda
es=
> > > much=EDsimo m=E1s corta que la imagen del frente.
>
> > > Lo dem=E1s, es tratar de mantener el mito, para beneficio de los
icono=
s
> > > religiosos.
>
> > Perdon. Sera otro pintor. Da Vinci nacio en 1452 y murio en 1519. Hay
> > pruebas que el sudario existia mucho antes que Da Vinci naciera.
>
> > Para obtener mas datos:
>
> >http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudario_de_Tur%C3%ADn
>
> PLEASE CHECK ALSO:http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/shroud.html
>
> THE ARTICLE ON THE SHROUD IS NOW BEING REVISED.
>
> I APOLOGIZE FOR MY ERROR IN THE DATE:
>
> This is a further clarification.
>
> PIDO EXCUSAS **** LA FECHA EQUIVOCADA.
>
> =C9sta es una clarificaci=F3n sobre el mismo, con diversos puntos de
vista=
..
>
> For years opponents of the Shroud's authenticity have been proclaiming
> that the image was a painting (McCrone) or a rubbing (Joe Nickell). The
> argument of this book presupposes that the image on the Shroud is not a
> painting and, in fact, is that of an actual human body: considerable
> admissions from the sindonoclast camp. It is a position that concedes
> that no ancient artistic technique is known by which the anatomically
> correct human figure on the Turin Shroud could have been manufactured.
> It accepts that the Shroud fits no medieval artistic genre or style. The
> Shroud's image is very faint, superficial (it is known that the image on
> the Turin Shroud resides only on the peaks of the fibers) and lacks
> artists' pigments and brush strokes. (See Isabel Piczek's article [on
> this website], "Is The Shroud of Turin a Painting?", demoli****ng the
> notion of the Shroud as a painting.)
>
> The title of this book asks "In Whose Image?" The authors provide an
> answer: Leonardo da Vinci was genius enough to have created it. On this
> point it is difficult to disagree, judging from the work of Leonardo and
> Vasari's high praise of his genius. Leonardo's notebooks have revealed
> an incredibly fertile scientific curiosity and creativity. All would
> agree in a casual way that IF anyone could have invented a rudimentary
> method of photography in the Renaissance, he is a plausible candidate.
> They go further: Only Leonardo could have done it. This is probably not
> true, as other artists are known to have studied anatomy, experimented
> with sfumato technique, and, as alchemists, worked with vegetal and
> mineral chemicals. The authors' next conclusion is one that does not
> follow by the rules of logic or history: Because Leonardo could have
> done it, therefore he DID do it. He did it, moreover, not by any method
> of conventional art, but by means of photography, and the Shroud is
> proof of it.
>
> Shroud "politics" aside, Leonardo as author of the Shroud is a
> wonderfully exciting, if sensationalist, idea. It draws strength from
> the science of radiocarbon (C14) dating, which in 1988 proclaimed, with
> 95% certainty, that the Shroud was produced in the late Middle Ages
> between 1260 and 1390. Sadly for the premise of this book, Leonardo was
> not born until 1452 (died 1519). The C14 labs, however, also reinforce
> the message of confidence in their dates by adding that they are 99.9%
> certain the Shroud was produced between 1000 and 1500, making it
> chronologically possible for Leonardo to have made it.
>
> The Leonardo connection loses virtually its entire scientific
> underpinning, however, when one notices that the labs are thus only
> about 5% certain of the extended time span and only 2.5% certain the
> Shroud could be as late as 1500. They are, after all, 95% certain it was
> made 1260-1390. Since 1988, the only doubts about these late radiocarbon
> dates for the Shroud are pointing to a much earlier time, and not in the
> chronological direction needed by Picknett and Prince. Blissful, the
> authors further believe that the face of the man on the Shroud is a
> self-photograph of Leonardo, one that closely resembles his well known
> self-****trait in red chalk with only the salient highlights of his
> features sketched in. Meanwhile, they suggest that the body on the
> Shroud is that of a crucified cadaver studied by Leonardo. So, they
> suppose, history's proto photo is a clever composite. Everyone knows
> that the face on the Shroud does seem on sight to be disembodied; this
> is owing to the absence of image where the Shroud was stretched over the
> collarbone, too distant from the body at that point to leave its marks.
> Ockham's razor would prefer this mundane explanation over one so
> patently and tendentiously striving to make itself respectable.
Sin duda existen diferentes puntos de vistas. como decia Grau San
Martin: Hay dulce para todos. Escoja usted la suya. Yo escogi la mia.
Saludos cordiales,
|
