08 Dec 16
Originally posted by stellspalfieThe shroud is the only cloth, when a photo is taken, produces an image on a negative.
I'm not sure I understand your first sentence, could you clarify for me, thanks.
Meaning, if you take a photo of any other cloth, no image will appear on the photo negative.
This is why the shroud stands out.
08 Dec 16
1 edit
Originally posted by chaney3I can assure you that whatever cloth you photograph in the whole wide world, an image will appear on the negative. That's how cameras work. I think what you are trying to say is that the image on the cloth, is a negative. It is hardly the only cloth ever to have a negative image printed on it.
The shroud is the only cloth, when a photo is taken, produces an image on a negative.
Meaning, if you take a photo of any other cloth, no image will appear on the photo negative.
This is why the shroud stands out.
Here:
http://www.zazzle.com/fern_tree_with_flowers_negative_t_shirt-235695902601370429
Buy yourself a T-shirt.
Then go get an education.
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
08 Dec 16
1 edit
Originally posted by chaney3Sorry I don't intend to be rude..but...as twhitehead has stated all things produce an image on a negative, its how photo's on film work.
The shroud is the only cloth, when a photo is taken, produces an image on a negative.
Meaning, if you take a photo of any other cloth, no image will appear on the photo negative.
This is why the shroud stands out.
If I took a white cloth and drew a picture of a dog on it in a different colour then took a photo, the picture of the dog would appear on the negative rather than the negative being all black or all white.
08 Dec 16
Originally posted by chaney3Or, conversely...
You have no proof otherwise, or we would know about it.
You are an atheist. Keep your opinion to yourself. You have no proof regarding the shroud.
You have no proof, just wild and quite mad conjecture. You are a very silly theist, keep your opinions to yourself, you have no proof etc. etc.
Incidentally, are you drunk?
08 Dec 16
Originally posted by avalanchethecatAfter all, it was created around the year 700 if I am not mistaken. The scientists who sampled the shroud when it was available to scientists took as a sample a repaired section which clocked in around 1400 or so but that was a big mistake taking a repair job. They shoud have had the sense to have seen it was a repair which reason would have suggested it came from a later date. Idiots just didn't think, just clip off a piece first place they looked, or maybe they KNEW it would date later in a misguided and biased effort to prove the date way later than JC. At any rate they did not get a sample of the original cloth.
Of course it can. What property do you imagine it has that can't be duplicated?
09 Dec 16
Originally posted by chaney3I provided proof. T-shirts.
You have no proof otherwise, or we would know about it.
You are an atheist. Keep your opinion to yourself. You have no proof regarding the shroud.
I have proof that what you are saying is hogwash. Why should I keep that opinion to myself?