--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Hugo" <fintlewoodlewix@> wrote: > <snip> > > The most recent findings I know of are that the face is > > identical to one of Leonardo's drawings that he made of > > a cadaver he was studying in one of his pursuits of > > understanding how the body really worked. Facial recognition > > software apparently matches them perfectly. > > > > Also the head is too small for the body and the picture > > is bigger at the front than the back, meaning that when > > the exposure was made (it really appears to be a photograph) > > they did the front and back seperately and got the wrong > > distance from the camera obscura in one of them. > > > > The most obvious error to me is that it looks like a photo > > and not like the image would if it had been draped over some- > > ones head. That would've stretched it and he'd end up looking > > like an alien - which might start a whole new conspiracy! > > > > I saw these guys do a lecture on it that became a docmentary > > that I can't find a link to: > > > > http://www.picknettprince.com/books/turinshroud/turin.htm > > Fascinating. They say the Shroud image is a perfect > match with a Leonardo painting of Christ, "Salvator > Mundi" (minus the moustache and beard). They have > links to two very impressive .wmv videos; the first > juxtaposes the painting with the Shroud image, the > second juxtaposes the Leonardo painting to another > painting somebody else made from a negative image of > the Shroud. Worth a look. > > Turin Shroud to Salvator Mundi: > > http://www.picknettprince.com/books/turinshroud/Shroud%20to%20Salvator%20quick%20version.wmv > > http://tinyurl.com/y4tsza5 > > Aggemian's Shroud Portrait to Salvator Mundi: > > http://www.picknettprince.com/books/turinshroud/Shroud%2002%20-%20aggemian%20shroud%20portrait%20to%20salvator%20mundi.wmv > > http://tinyurl.com/y5pcz5t
I think these were the ones they showed there lecture, they had only just worked it out and were rather excited. Don't blame them. > > They are very convincing and have left the ball in the court > > of the believers to disprove them. I think it will run and run > > at least until it gets handed over to science so they can do a > > better job of testing it than they did last time. > > Hard to see how the similarity between the Shroud > image and the paintings could be explained otherwise. > Maybe scientific evidence dating the Shroud isn't even > required. No amount of evidence will convince a believer to the contrary as, erm, someone said. But definitively dating it to Leonardo's day would really be something, if only because it would push the date of the first photograph back by a few hundred years! Whatever the truth of it is I still think it's a beautiful thing. Very eerie, I'd love to see it in it's religious home, if only there wasn't a bloody volcano erupting I'd get a cheap flight over there....
