Shroud of Turin Debunked? Think Again

In this video, we dive deep into the latest scientific evidence for the Shroud of Turin, exposing the overlooked flaws and surprising truths that could change everything we thought we knew.

#Apologetics #CapturingChristianity #ExistenceofGod

[ApostolicStorm]

Jesus could descend from Heaven, loudly proclaiming that He is the Son of God…yet these people still won’t listen.

[OGStinkywizzleteats]

I like how everyone totally ignores the Sudarium cloth of Oviedo. It gives validity to the shroud in that there is a known history going back to the late 600's a.d. It also shares over 120 points of similarity in the bloodstain pattern on the shroud. They were definitely from the same body.

[stevenkent]

When believers in the shroud raised the question that the fire could’ve thrown off the carbon dating, skeptics laughed and said that’s ridiculous.

Decades later a more advanced dating method puts the shroud in the 1st century. Skeptics: “This can’t be trusted, the fire could’ve artificially aged the shroud”!

Crazy how that works..

[AL-rffr]

The critics are ignoring the Science because it doesn’t suit their theological beliefs.

[cindywindy]

Fire away.... It's real and Jesus is real

[jonahkattau]

I haven't got much to add to the conversation but here's some free YouTube points.

[kensmith]

All dating aside, the clincher for me has always been the fact that there’s no technology today that can replicate the shroud, let alone in the twelfth century! In fact there was an one million dollar challenge to anyone who could replicate it and no one ever took it!
Most detractors reject it ad hoc while not addressing the scientific aspects of it’s existence. Most will focus on the 1988 carbon dating of it, but fail to consider other alternatives for the discrepancies

[borneandayak]

I don't think the shroud is fake. Its impossible to explain the shroud with a ton of other cumulative facts around it.

[BBassistChrist]

I like Dr. Falk, but I do think he drops the ball when it comes to his opinions on the Shroud of Turin. I grew up believing it was a fake, but the fact that scientists are completely unable to explain the image is really staggering to me. The level of details are too high for somebody 600 years ago to forge. "And lets make sure we condense the blood on a microscopic level around his shoulder where he carried the cross so future scientists will think he carried a weight after being whipped."

[ShaunCKennedyAuthor]

The criticism regarding the blind sampling is telling. They don't need additional samples from the shroud. They need additional samples not from the shroud. If they can take ten samples, and have them labeled A-J, can they put them in order of age?

There was an episode of Myth Busters where they were testing the myth that if you run some kind of alcoholic beverage through a water filter, it can turn the cheep stuff into the good stuff. Along with Adam and Jamie, they invited a professional taste tester to help judge. Each person got a cup that was unfiltered, a cup that had the expensive stuff, then eight more cups each of which had been run through the filter between one and eight times. They were labeled with random letters, and no two had the letters correspond to the same things. Then they had to put them in order from least favorite to favorite. I found it telling that everyone put the unfiltered at the bottom and the expensive stuff at the top, but only the professional taste tester put them in order, and hers was perfect, unfiltered at the bottom, then the one that had been filtered once, then the one that had been filtered twice, and so on. I think Jamie had them mostly in the right order, but a few flipped around, and Adam only got the top and bottom in the right place and everything else looked like it had been shuffled. It really showed that the professional knew what she was doing.

That's what they're asking for. Get ten sample linen pieces, and have them recorded and put into sample containers for the research team so that they don't know anything except that they are linen. Then have them give the estimated ages for the samples. If they're right, or if they can at least put them in order from youngest to oldest, it proves that the technique works. But where they're only testing pieces where they know the ages and a lot of their process is eyeballs instead of machines, it's harder to know for sure if they're just seeing what they want to see or if they're really that good at judging. Are they Adam, Jamie, or the professional?

[stevenwiederholt]

Believers do not Need the shroud to be the burial shroud of Jesus. Non Believers Need it to be false.

[MarcosSilveira-vxnn]

People against shroud: "shroud is false because I don't trust in scientists, only in Richard Dawkins and Lawrence Krauss". The scientists of shroud: the science does not care about your OPINION!

[TempleoftheSon]

He's a level 4 anti-theist. The thing about level 4 anti-theists is that they wouldn't even believe if they themselves stuck their fingers in Jesus' wounds.

[JoeArant]

Dr. Falk has an excellent response to this video. It’s worth a listen…

[brendanbutler]

There's never enough evidence for someone who's not open to the truth.

[jjcm]

a very interesting piece of evidence counteracting Islam's claim about Christ's crucifixion. Hard evidence. A very very big problem for muslims.

[Alexander-frkk]

Some people will deny something no matter what the evidence… pray for him.

[MultiSky]

Thank you for talking about them and their "debunking".

[mastermiller]

What a joke that he takes issue with there being 9 control samples when the 1980's carbon dating used a single site with 7 samples to carbon date rather than several different sites. The site in question was repaired with cotton fibers which was a later addition to the linen cloth. He spouts on about supposed terrible methodology when most of the claims against the shroud with the carbon dating was flawed from the very beginning. And as of today, I have not seen anyone replicate the shroud. The image is microns thick, it was created with a degree of accuracy that no medieval forger could have replicated. Nor was it made with pigments or dyes and there are no traces of photosensitive chemicals found to create a photographic negative.

[lesmen]

Burnt or not burnt, can someone recreate this Shroud is a mystery even today.