Hailed as "the holy objects" shroud of Turin has always been a generation after generation of pilgrims prostrate oneself in worship, they make light of travelling a thousand li to travel over land and water, is a glimpse of the relic of the true face of Mount Lu. They also believe that, he saw the crucified Jesus's face on the shroud. But the use of carbon 14 dating, scientists can only be the shroud of Turin dating back to the middle ages, then, the relic has sparked heated debate.
Now, Lillian Schwarz USA painter (Lillian Schwartz) are also involved in this debate, and put forward his theory of the origin of the shroud of Turin. Schwartz is a graphic design consultant, College of Visual Arts in New York, she points out, the portrait of Jesus is da Finch's self portrait, is forged by a crude photographic technique.
The use of computer scanning, Schwartz found a self portrait with the same size portrait of Jesus and Da Finch on the shroud of Turin. The last century 80's, Schwartz told the "Monalisa" and a self portrait of Da Vinci were measured in detail, and with the conclusions become the focus of world attention. At that time, she was surprised to find that the facial contour Monalisa with self portrait of Da Vinci is almost as like as two peas. This finding prompted her to get a surprise -- that Da Finch is a self portrait as a model, to create the picture be known to all the world's oil painting.
At the beginning of 2009, Schwartz will be another of Da Finch's self portrait and the shroud of Turin on the portrait of Jesus were compared using the same technique. She said: "they were actually facial contour is consistent. This discovery made me feel very excited. Da Finch recorded the facial proportions was used to forge the shroud of the portrait of Jesus, which I believe firmly."
The night of July 1st, a documentary film will be broadcast on channel fifth in the uk. The documentary, as Finch uses sculpture on its head and a "black box" of photographic equipment, the facial features "its own copy" to shroud (made of linen). Presumably, Da Finch is a complete fraud in a darkroom. First he will shroud hung on a frame and coated with the light sensitive material, the shroud like a film. When sunlight passes through a lens on the wall, Da Finch's head sculpture will be projected onto the shroud, to forge a permanent head of Jesus.
The Turin shroud researcher Lynn Picknett (Lynn Picknett) said: "the incredible, it is hard to believe. Forged shroud guy must be a pagan. He must be very understanding of anatomy and proficient in a technique for fraud. This guy almost fooled everyone, until twentieth Century was exposed."
Fifth channel documentary that, when Da Finch was obsessed with optical equipment, he notes to draw some of the most obscure sketch early. Picknett pointed out: "if Da Finch knew, in his own death 500 years, generations of pilgrims are still on the so-called Jesus head prostrate oneself in worship, I think he would have laughed."
Although the shroud of Turin continues to attract the attention of many people, but most people have to admit that it was a forgery. 1988 carbon 14 dating show, the shroud is built in the 1260 to 1390. But scientists not to Jesus head itself for determination of carbon in 14.
In the face of Schwartz's bold speculation, America Colorado the shroud of Turin center director John Jackson (John Jackson) professor still believe, the head of Jesus dating back to Jesus Friday, refused to accept the views of Da Finch. He said: "this conclusion made some very poor scientific and historical knowledge based on."
The earliest known record of the shroud of Turin in mid fourteenth Century casting a medal, the medal is now preserved in the Ba Leigh Clunie museum. Jackson said: "on the badge pattern clearly shows the priest hands shroud, which date back to about 100 years before Finch was born. At present there is no evidence to show, the existence of any relationship between Da Finch and the shroud." The professor points out, because of the shroud of Turin is polluted, carbon 14 dating method, the conclusion would be wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment