Rational Faith


Is the Shroud of Turin Authentic?
Supplemental Evidence 02: Paulo Di Lazzaro:
Every scientific attempt to replicate the shroud in a lab has failed.
 


 

 



 
 

Agreed: No one knows how the image was placed on the shroud

In an article titled "The Shroud of Turin: Evidence of Everything", Dwight Longnecker describes the research performed by Italian physicist Paoli Di Lazzaro.  He writes:

So what formed the image? The best description is that it is an extremely delicate singe marking. Italian physicist Paolo Di Lazzaro concedes in an article for National Geographic that every scientific attempt to replicate it in a lab has failed. “Its precise hue is highly unusual, and the color’s penetration into the fabric is extremely thin, less than 0.7 micrometers (0.000028 inches), one-thirtieth the diameter of an individual fiber in a single 200-fiber linen thread.”[1]

Di Lazzaro and his colleagues at Italy’s National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA) experimented for five years, using modern excimer lasers to train short bursts of ultraviolet light on raw linen, in an effort to simulate the image’s coloration.

They came tantalizingly close to replicating the image’s distinctive color on a few square centimeters of fabric. However, they were unable to match all the physical and chemical characteristics of the shroud image, and reproducing a whole human figure was far beyond them. De Lazzaro explained that the ultraviolet light necessary to reproduce the image of the crucified man “exceeds the maximum power released by all ultraviolet light sources available today.” The time for such a burst would be shorter than one forty-billionth of a second, and the intensity of the ultra violet light would have to be around several billion watts.

The scientists shrug and say the only explanation lies beyond the realm of twenty-first century technoscience. In other words, the extraordinary burst of ultra violet light is not only beyond the ability and technology of a medieval forger: It is beyond the ability and technology of the best twenty-first century scientists."

Need I point out the obvious?

  1. "Tantalizingly close" is not a match for the genuine article
  2. The confession that they are "Unable to match all the physical and chemical characteristics of the shroud image" means they weren't even close
  3. Even all the UV light sources in the world available today working together don't produce enough power to create the image
  4. This is yet another round of scientific study (in addition to the original 1978 STRP examination and many others) that have reached the conclusion that modern technology - in this case modern 21st century excimer lasers shooting UV light - is unable to replicate the image. The best modern day scientists cannot figure out a way to create the image on the shroud. And we're supposed to believe a medieval artist using medieval techniques created it?



Evidence for article:
Is the Shroud of Turin Authentic - The Unconsidered Evidence

Reference:
The Shroud of Turin - Evidence of Everything
Dwight Longnecker, The Imaginative Conservative, August 9th, 2015, https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2015/08/shroud-of-turin-evidence-for-everything.html

also available here:
The Shroud of Turin - Evidence of Everything
Diwight Longnecker, The Stream, April 13, 2020, https://stream.org/the-shroud-of-turin-evidence-for-everything/

 

Notes
1. For more on the depth of the image, see here.
Back