# Should atheists take the Shroud of Turin seriously? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 14, 2014, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680 "2014-03-14T10:11:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/61 "2014-03-16T01:07:15Z")
> [@Kenm](#): > > Easy. It’s [**Bette Davis**](http://www.examiner.com/article/one-good-picture-is-all-i-need-bette-davis-had-more-than-100). Bette Davis was a Virgin? ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/62 "2014-03-16T01:38:46Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Bette Davis was a Virgin? Over and over again. Miraculous, wasn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Melchior](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/63 "2014-03-16T01:52:41Z")
‘Science’ doesn’t take anything any way. No scientist takes it seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/64 "2014-03-16T02:41:09Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Bette Davis was a Virgin? That’s her story, and she’s sticking to it. ---
**Author:** ![TruCelt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trucelt/32/523_2.png) [@TruCelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TruCelt)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/65 "2014-03-16T02:45:27Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > To me, the REAL miracle is the [Virgin Mary in Grilled Cheese Sandwich](http://seekingcanaan.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/virgin-mary-grilled-cheese.gif). Explain that, atheists! Looks more like [Hedy Lamarr](http://www.liverpoolcathedral.org.uk/UserFiles//Hedy%20Lamarr.jpg) IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Kenm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bc79bd/32.png) [@Kenm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kenm)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/66 "2014-03-16T02:50:56Z")
**No, no. The [other Lamarr](https://www.google.com/search?as_st=y&tbm=isch&as_q=&as_epq=hedley+lamarr&as_oq=&as_eq=&imgsz=&imgar=&imgc=&imgcolor=&imgtype=&cr=&as_sitesearch=&safe=images&as_filetype=&as_rights=#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=FYE3O56UFUqoZM%253A%3B-qX3GSB3h2iroM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252F3.bp.blogspot.com%252F-qR-FxPpggg8%252FTtZCfMcrESI%252FAAAAAAAAGPc%252Fuayf4RO_Soc%252Fs1600%252Fhedleylamarr.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fjrients.blogspot.com%252F2011%252F11%252Fhedley-lamarr-high-priest-of-evil-chaos.html%3B240%3B240).** ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/67 "2014-03-16T02:51:25Z")
To the OP: No more than Catholics should, tops. ---
**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/68 "2014-03-16T03:03:14Z")
There have been up to 18 different Holy Prepuces. Obviously, Yeshua Ben Yoseph was a lad to admire. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/69 "2014-03-16T03:07:27Z")
It’s the same thing with relics of the Buddha. If you put together all the holy body parts of the Buddha – bones and teethmostly – that are floating around, you’d probably have a dozen men! ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/70 "2014-03-16T04:13:25Z")
> [@TruCelt](#): > > Looks more like [Hedy Lamarr](http://www.liverpoolcathedral.org.uk/UserFiles//Hedy%20Lamarr.jpg) IMHO. Looks like Dawn Wells to me. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/71 "2014-03-16T13:25:57Z")
> [@Melchior](#): > > ‘Science’ doesn’t take anything any way. No scientist takes it seriously. You might be surprised at what indivdiual scientists take seriously. (I’m a scientist in training- just a lowly postdoctoral researcher right now so i won’t claim ‘scientist’, but I believe in a lot of things that atheists/agnostics would find very hard to take seriously). There is some interesting discussion of the Shroud of Turin at the ‘Ship of Fools’ Christian debate forum, and one of its most vocal defenders there is a conservative Catholic there who claims to be a physicist currently working in neuroscience. It’s the internet, so for all we know he could be a 15-year old troll, but his posts seem, at least to me, very well informed and credible. ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2014, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/72 "2014-03-16T18:14:06Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > You might be surprised at what indivdiual scientists take seriously… One aspect that _does_ seem to deserve scientific scrutiny is the question of how the shroud was painted. As I remember,I don’t think anybody has ever come up with a way to explain all the details. (I think there were inconsistencies in things like the thickness of the paint and the way it was absorbed by the cotton, etc.). I first learned about the shroud when National Geographic magazine devoted a whole issue to it (about 30 years ago!) and they concluded that it’s a very mysterious object, very difficult to replicate with our knowledge of medieval art techniques. And that alone makes it worth taking seriously by scientists (and art historians). Because science should be fun. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/73 "2014-03-17T10:28:48Z")
> [@chappachula](#): > > One aspect that _does_ seem to deserve scientific scrutiny is the question of how the shroud was painted. As I remember,I don’t think anybody has ever come up with a way to explain all the details. > (I think there were inconsistencies in things like the thickness of the paint and the way it was absorbed by the cotton, etc.). > > I first learned about the shroud when National Geographic magazine devoted a whole issue to it (about 30 years ago!) and they concluded that it’s a very mysterious object, very difficult to replicate with our knowledge of medieval art techniques. > And that alone makes it worth taking seriously by scientists (and art historians). > Because science should be fun. 🙂 There was a man in Arizona who created a similar thing by putting a cloth( with blood or what. I don’t remember) but made such an image by placing it in the hot sun. ---
**Author:** ![Meatros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Meatros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Meatros)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/74 "2014-03-17T13:22:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t think theists need to take it seriously either. It’s like the Donation of Constantine - **old enough to interesting** , but still clearly a fake. > > Regards, > Shodan Pretty much this. I find it, and other religious ‘artifacts’ (fake or not) to be interesting. ---
**Author:** ![Cubsfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Cubsfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cubsfan)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/75 "2014-03-17T18:59:46Z")
I did a report on the shroud in eighth grade and I can assure you is is real. Jesus was in there. I did use a book as my reference. ---
**Author:** ![Melchior](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Melchior](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melchior)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2014, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/76 "2014-03-17T19:26:55Z")
> [@Cubsfan](#): > > I did a report on the shroud in eighth grade and I can assure you is is real. Jesus was in there. I did use a book as my reference. Are you now in the 9th grade? What book was it? _Peter Pan_? ---
**Author:** ![Grestarian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grestarian/32/3227_2.png) [@Grestarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grestarian)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/77 "2014-03-18T00:38:05Z")
> [@protoboard](#): > > It seems like science takes the Shroud rather seriously, though perhaps this is just because it’s been studied so long. Well, “science takes the Shroud rather seriously” in the sense that it has been tested by chemists and physicists and examined by art historians and anthropologists and archeologists and all sorts of other experts in various fields of science. But to suggest that such study somehow supports the validity of the mythology of _Jesus the Messianic(sp?) incarnation of a deity_ would be to suggest that “science” equally supports the validity of the divine incarnations of the Egyptian pantheon, the Norse pantheon, and (as I mentioned in another thread and on other boards) the Japanese pantheon. In other words, there are educated specialists studying the artifacts they are “taking it seriously” and therefore there must be some validity to the tales is a pretty poor argument because studying something is not necessarily indicative of believing the fantastic stories surrounding it. And, by the way, for other participants of this thread: Perhaps the OP can be given a bit of slack? Because it kinda looks like a lot of people are stomping on his toes for suggesting the Shroud is authentic. I think the tag-question below is a turn of phrase meant to encourage discussion, rather than an indication he’s on the verge of converting to The Faith. > [@protoboard](#): > > Personally I think it’s just a very clever hoax, after all the 13th century in Italy was hardly the Stone Age, but who knows right? –G! ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/78 "2014-03-18T02:52:04Z")
I’ve always wondered why some people find it so difficult to believe that con men could have existed in the Middle Ages. ---
**Author:** ![Grestarian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grestarian/32/3227_2.png) [@Grestarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grestarian)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2014, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/79 "2014-03-18T23:29:28Z")
> [@Siam\_Sam](#): > > I’ve always wondered why some people find it so difficult to believe that con men could have existed in the Middle Ages. Middle Ages? Doesn’t the Bible make a big deal out of the Bronze Age brother of Lot wheedling and convincing and arguing to get God to go easy on a city full of immoral people? “Eighty good men? Would ya settle for seventy? Yeah, seventy? Well, would ya settle for sixty? Come on…think about it…”🆒 [Well, okay. That’s more salesmanship than con artistry.] Protoboard mentions the stone age. I kinda think men, in general, have been con artists since before the stone age – part of the Y chromosome. “Hey, baby. Let me share this deer meat with ya. No, I won’t hurt you at --aha! Gotcha!”😃 Now-a-days, we call that date-rape but back then and even through biblical times, it was considered normal male/female relations. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![erysichthon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d07c76/32.png) [@erysichthon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erysichthon)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2014, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680/80 "2014-03-20T03:51:18Z")
> [@ZenBeam](#): > > Are there other burial shrouds still around from the 1300s and from Christ’s time? Have any of these been examined for faint imprints? In 2009, an archaelogist named Shimon Gibson discovered [an actual first-century burial shroud](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/12/091216-shroud-of-turin-jesus-jerusalem-leprosy/) in Jerusalem. It was **nothing** like the Shroud of Turin. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-atheists-take-the-shroud-of-turin-seriously/683680.md?page=5)