Re: thoughts on Jesus

On 6/4/2008 9:55 AM, alwaysaskingquestions went clickity clack on the keyboard and produced this interesting bit of text:
"Vernon Balbert" <vbalbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Jdz1k.7529$Ri.9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 6/4/2008 9:10 AM, alwaysaskingquestions went clickity clack on the keyboard and produced this interesting bit of text:
"Vernon Balbert" <vbalbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:cSw1k.6258$mh5.1327@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 6/4/2008 5:48 AM, alwaysaskingquestions went clickity clack on the keyboard and produced this interesting bit of text:
"Ilas" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:Xns9AB3761F5978Dlurker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"alwaysaskingquestions" <alwaysaskingquestions@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6an6ipF371mddU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

"Ilas" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Xns9AB369C595092lurker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Science can't possibly say anything about a specific single case from
2000 years ago. What it can say is that dead people stay dead,
What it can say its that dead people *usually* stay dead.
No. It says dead people stay dead.
Pantomime season is starting early.
What the hell does that mean?
"Oh yes it is .... oh no it's not ... oh yes it is .... oh no it's not ..."

[...]

The only physical proof your church can offer is a cloth made in the 13th century that it believes is the burial cloth of Christ and has the actual image of Christ embedded in it even in the face of physical evidence to the contrary.
If you are going to have a rant, you should at least get your basic facts
right. The Church has no position on whether the shroud is genuine or not,
on the contrary, the Pope said it was entirely up to science to determine
that. In order to get a definitive answer, the Church even allowed the
scientists to cut bits off what *might* be a priceless relic; unfortunately,
it seems that the scientists may have made a *** up of the sampling and now
they (the scientists, not the Church) are arguing about whether the results
can be trusted.
a) there's ONE scientist who currently believes that the shroud is genuine and thinks the tests may be botched up and they could be off by over 1,000 years.

Do try to keep up, Vernon, the head of the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit which carried out the original carbon dating has just recently come out and agreed that the dating may be flawed and new tests need to be done.

I wasn't referring to him. I was referring to the guy who brought up objections in the first place. Ramsey is simply acknowledging that there may be factors that were not taken into account before that may adjust the dating of the fabric. However, he is of the informed opinion that it won't make a difference of a millennium. The guy who brought up the objections is the person I referred to.

--
I Work Hard Because Millions On Welfare Depend on Me

.