More Science Supports the Shroud

Political discussions
User avatar
andy7171
Firefly
Firefly
Posts: 27951
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 6:12 am
I am a fan of: Wiping.
A.K.A.: HE HATE ME
Location: Eastern Palouse

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by andy7171 »

JoltinJoe wrote:
dbackjon wrote:I don't see anywhere in the report that science supports it.

A whole lot of "mays" "could be" and "possibles"
Dude, don't rain on the parade. You do understand the intended purpose of this thread, don't you? ;)
Getting D1B involved?
"Elaine, you're from Baltimore, right?"
"Yes, well, Towson actually."
User avatar
ASUG8
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 17570
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:57 pm
I am a fan of: ASU
Location: SC

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by ASUG8 »

andy7171 wrote:
JoltinJoe wrote:
Dude, don't rain on the parade. You do understand the intended purpose of this thread, don't you? ;)
Getting D1B involved?
Methinks Joe might be as much a troll as D1B/Cappy. :nod:
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7050
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by JoltinJoe »

dbackjon wrote:
JoltinJoe wrote:
Dude, don't rain on the parade. You do understand the intended purpose of this thread, don't you? ;)


He's been too busy making Valentine Cards for his cats
:lol:
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7050
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by JoltinJoe »

ASUG8 wrote:
andy7171 wrote: Getting D1B involved?
Methinks Joe might be as much a troll as D1B/Cappy. :nod:
:come:
JoltinJoe
Level4
Level4
Posts: 7050
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 6:42 pm

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by JoltinJoe »

andy7171 wrote:
JoltinJoe wrote:
Dude, don't rain on the parade. You do understand the intended purpose of this thread, don't you? ;)
Getting D1B involved?
:stir:
User avatar
ASUG8
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 17570
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2009 12:57 pm
I am a fan of: ASU
Location: SC

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by ASUG8 »

ASUG8 wrote: Methinks Joe might be as much a troll as D1B/Cappy. :nod:
:stir:
The prosecution rests, your honor. :lol:
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19059
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by SeattleGriz »

dbackjon wrote:I don't see anywhere in the report that science supports it.

A whole lot of "mays" "could be" and "possibles"
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Those statements don't seem to stop most of the guys on this board from accepting the newest false, "missing link".

Love your selective scrutiny.
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
Vidav
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 10804
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:42 pm
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: The Russian
Location: Missoula, MT

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by Vidav »

SeattleGriz wrote:
dbackjon wrote:I don't see anywhere in the report that science supports it.

A whole lot of "mays" "could be" and "possibles"
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Those statements don't seem to stop most of the guys on this board from accepting the newest false, "missing link".

Love your selective scrutiny.
There is no such thing as a missing link.
User avatar
SeattleGriz
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 19059
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:41 am
I am a fan of: Montana
A.K.A.: PhxGriz

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by SeattleGriz »

Vidav wrote:
SeattleGriz wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Those statements don't seem to stop most of the guys on this board from accepting the newest false, "missing link".

Love your selective scrutiny.
There is no such thing as a missing link.
Exactly, but it sure doesn't stop Paleontologists from trotting out "something" every few years.

Okay, back to the intent of this thread.

Where is that pussy D1B to refute science?
Everything is better with SeattleGriz
User avatar
CID1990
Level5
Level5
Posts: 25486
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:40 am
I am a fan of: Pie
A.K.A.: CID 1990
Location: กรุงเทพมหานคร

Re: More Science Supports the Shroud

Post by CID1990 »

JoltinJoe wrote:
kalm wrote:
It suggests the bible was written long after events that were detailed in it. In other words it wouldn't be a direct account.
But we knew that about Genesis already.

We also know that the Gospels were formally written within the generation of those who actually knew Jesus.
Yeah we Scots Irish mountain folks have a similar phenomenon

We call them "tall tales" once they get repeated (and subsequently modified) over 50 years or so.
"You however, are an insufferable ankle biting mental chihuahua..." - Clizzoris
Post Reply