JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags pareidolia , shroud of turin

Closed Thread
Old 19th December 2012, 08:24 AM   #4441
Garrette
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,820
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I only have so much time for this -- which keeps shrinking (give me a PM if you want to hear my excuses) -- and, this is what I do for fun, so I naturally give it as much time as reasonable, at least.
- Then note that essentially all my posts are responses to your questions, accusations and comments otherwise. No one should be insulted by my lack of attention to their qac's -- I'm attending to as much as I have time for which to attend.
- And then, I've asked you to elect some sort of "gatekeeper" to tell me which qac to answer next, but you won't do it. If you did, you'd see that I would totally follow your lead (for half of my time at least).
- Does anyone here actually see my point (in a non-sarcastic way)?

--- Jabba
It doesn't fly, Jabba. I understand that the time you can devote to this is limited; it is limited for all of us. I also understand that the time available shrinks or varies and is not constant. It happens to all of us.

But there are things that have been repeatedly pointed out that you repeatedly fail to address:

1. You waste your available time on telling us what you will do when you could in fact spend your time on actually doing it.

2. You waste your time and ours by telling us you will tell us why you have no time to tell us anything if we will simply ask via pm. There is no conceivable circumstance in which this is anything but a complete waste of your limited time as well as a complete and obvious avoidance of the issues.

3. You neither need nor get to demand a gatekeeper. Despite the numerous posters here, the objections and questions are actually fairly limited.

4. You, and you alone, are the one who goes off on tangents and fails to focus your efforts on the core topics. You raised the Heller and Adler paper. People here read it (something you still have failed to do). Those people gave pointed and concise comments. Your response was to ignore those comments and repost summarized drivel that had already been addressed.

There's more, Jabba, but the cause of your problems is you. Nobody else. You should actually be grateful because in all your 20 years of research none of your fellow Shroudies has ever gotten you to look at the primary papers. It is only the skeptics here who have done that.

Doesn't that tell you something, Jabba? It is the skeptics and not the believers who are willing to look at the source papers and at the primary evidence? Everything, every last bit of evidence that you have posted and which you got from believer sites is secondary summaries which have been repeatedly shown to be inaccurate in their characterizations of the actual papers.

Dump your self-pity; it is not deserved.
__________________
My kids still love me.
Garrette is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th December 2012, 01:10 PM   #4442
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by Jabba
- I only have so much time for this -- which keeps shrinking (give me a PM if you want to hear my excuses) -- and, this is what I do for fun, so I naturally give it as much time as reasonable, at least.
You sound like a freshman, Jabba. "I spent HOURS studying for that test!!!" So what? Honestly, who cares and why should they? You used your time badly. You didn't even check your references. Your research methods are so sloppy that you can't find the sources you HAVE bothered to locate. You've ignored huge swaths of research, and quite tellingly all of that has been stuff that disagrees with you. If I spent ten lifetimes studying something I couldn't do anything useful that way.

Quote:
- Then note that essentially all my posts are responses to your questions, accusations and comments otherwise. No one should be insulted by my lack of attention to their qac's -- I'm attending to as much as I have time for which to attend.
As I told you months ago, you could easily side-step this issue by actually doing the research properly and presenting coherent arguments. Most of the questions you've received fall into a limited number of categories, and each category could be dealt with as a whole. Instead, you prefer to get bogged down in minutia as a transparent attempt at deliberate obfuscation.

Quote:
- And then, I've asked you to elect some sort of "gatekeeper" to tell me which qac to answer next,
Yes, we know you've attempted to dictate how this conversation will go. Our answer was "No. Play by the rules of scientific discourse or go away." You don't get special treatment merely because you're incompetent.

Quote:
- Does anyone here actually see my point (in a non-sarcastic way)?
Of course. You have no idea what a scientific debate is and were entirely unprepared for one, yet entered into an archaeological discussion and demanded to be treated as an expert. Then you started complaining because we took you seriously and actually bothered to think about what you wrote.

Sorry, Jabba, but I have absolutely no sympathy for you. After a year you have to know what you got yourself into. It's time to either accept that this is a scientific discussion and abide by the rules of such discussions, or admit that you're unwilling to do so and abandon the pretense that you can actually evaluate the scientific claims on either side (someone else may be able to, but if you can't play by the rules YOU certainly can't).
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 19th December 2012, 01:29 PM   #4443
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 11,386
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Pakeha,
- I don't care whether or not anyone reads my site. If you notice, I haven't entered anything over there for a long time.
-What I need is a permanent space to which I can keep adding evidence (pro, as well as con). Over here, the best I can do is to keep repeating the last summary post, with whatever new evidence I have, newly attached...
--- Jabba
I haven't noticed what you've posted at your site; I've not been there for some time.
Do you mean you've never kept note of evidence at all?

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
...- And then, I've asked you to elect some sort of "gatekeeper" to tell me which qac to answer next, but you won't do it. If you did, you'd see that I would totally follow your lead (for half of my time at least).
- Does anyone here actually see my point (in a non-sarcastic way)?
No. The request for a gatekeeper is neither more nor less than an effort to control the discussion. It will never happen.

Last edited by pakeha; 19th December 2012 at 01:30 PM.
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 01:11 AM   #4444
David Mo
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 363
I think we have here the classic problem with vagueness in the sindonist language. They send us to Applied Optics paper, because it is peer reviewed and concluding. Yes, it is peer reviewed, but not concluding. In this article Adler and Heller send us to a new one by Morris et allia. They said once again that it is concluding. Not at all. “In ‘blood’ stain regions the measurements show significantly higher concentrations of iron. However, the data do not allow a unique identification of the stain's origin”. (Morris, R. A; Schwalbe, L. A. ; London, J. R. : “X-ray fluorescence investigation of the Shroud of Turin”. X-Ray Spectrometry, Volume 9, Issue 2, pages 40–47, April 1980. Subscription is required).

David Ford is actually the main source for sindonism literature about blood. (Ford, David: “The Shroud of Turin’s ‘Blood’ Images: Blood, or Paint? A History of Science Inquiry”. 2000. www.shroud.com/pdfs/ford1.pdf ). This one is not peer reviewed. Obviously, because Ford is not an expert. He was a history student in 2000. And this paper is a novelette or hagiographic pamphlet pro Adler and Heller and against McCrone. Something as Adversus haereses. The two main sources of Ford’s article are Heller, J.H. y A.D. Adler: “A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin. ” (Canadian Society of Forensic Journal, (1981)) and Heller’s book Report on the Shroud of Turin (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983). Houghton Mifflin Hartcour is a generalist publishing. His great best seller in the last Century was Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking. Their first aim is student books.

To check this bibliography is difficult. The 1981 paper seems more serious but there is only a paper version. Not easy to find. If you read with care the Ford’s pdf you must distinguish between original ideas from Adler&Heller and “clever” deductions made by Ford. It is neither easy because novelistic author’s style.

In essence, I think there are two main points in the cause of blood in the shroud: High level of iron in the stains and hydrazine test. And there are two main points against the blood: bright colour and absence of some classic components of blood as potassium. All this with respect to chemical and microscopical evidence and take for granted the accuracy of the studies. I am not able to check this last point.

Other archaeological and forensic evidences against blood can be argued. But this is another subject.

Addenda: I am working on blood topic for my blog La sombra en el sudario. Chemistry and Physics are not my strong points. If someone wants to comment about or correct something I have written above this will be good for me. Thanks.
David Mo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 01:45 AM   #4445
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
tsig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 31,840
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I only have so much time for this -- which keeps shrinking (give me a PM if you want to hear my excuses) -- and, this is what I do for fun, so I naturally give it as much time as reasonable, at least.
- Then note that essentially all my posts are responses to your questions, accusations and comments otherwise. No one should be insulted by my lack of attention to their qac's -- I'm attending to as much as I have time for which to attend.
- And then, I've asked you to elect some sort of "gatekeeper" to tell me which qac to answer next, but you won't do it. If you did, you'd see that I would totally follow your lead (for half of my time at least).
- Does anyone here actually see my point (in a non-sarcastic way)?

--- Jabba
Well since I only have 24 hours in a day I'm going to respond to this post in my next post when I will again probably not have enough time to properly respond to the post I will be responding to unless you can appoint a "gatekeeper" to keep me on track of which posts I am not responding to at the time.
tsig is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 06:52 AM   #4446
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 27,981
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
Well since I only have 24 hours in a day I'm going to respond to this post in my next post when I will again probably not have enough time to properly respond to the post I will be responding to unless you can appoint a "gatekeeper" to keep me on track of which posts I am not responding to at the time.


I am more than happy to accept the rôle and responsibility implied by acceptance of the appointment, "tsig's gatekeeper" and in that capacity I am, without fear or favour, pleased to announce the scores to date:
tsig and various assembled critical thinkers:
1 billion points
Jabba:
nil
Jeux de cartes
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

The Australasian Skeptics Forum
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 07:10 AM   #4447
Resume
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,714
Originally Posted by Akhenaten View Post
I am more than happy to accept the rôle and responsibility implied by acceptance of the appointment, "tsig's gatekeeper" and in that capacity I am, without fear or favour, pleased to announce the scores to date:
tsig and various assembled critical thinkers:
1 billion points
Jabba:
nil
Jeux de cartes
Seems like a bad result. I predict the Black Knight's Gambit.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 07:23 AM   #4448
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 27,981
And after the spanking?
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

The Australasian Skeptics Forum
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 02:09 PM   #4449
Agatha
Winking at the Moon
 
Agatha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 5,276
Originally Posted by Akhenaten View Post
And after the spanking?
The oral sex! It is Christmas, after all.

I have given up expecting Jabba to post substantive replies to this thread, so we may as well post Monty Python quotes.
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint - it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly... timey wimey... stuff.
Agatha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 02:29 PM   #4450
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Welsh Wales
Posts: 6,604
Originally Posted by Agatha View Post
The oral sex! It is Christmas, after all.

I have given up expecting Jabba to post substantive replies to this thread, so we may as well post Monty Python quotes.
I don't know if it's time for that yet. The arguments for shroud authenticity are just resting. Probably pining for the fjords middle east.
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 02:37 PM   #4451
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry...
Posts: 6,169
Originally Posted by Mashuna View Post
I don't know if it's time for that yet. The arguments for shroud authenticity are just resting. Probably pining for the fjords middle east.
The only reason those arguments are still in this post is because they've been nailed there!
__________________
"Anything that can be accepted into science gets accepted into science." -HighRiser
"And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar
"That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 02:38 PM   #4452
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Welsh Wales
Posts: 6,604
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
The only reason those arguments are still in this post is because they've been nailed there!
Those nail marks are authentic crucifixion evidence, my lad!
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 05:55 PM   #4453
Blue Mountain
Resident Skeptical Hobbit
 
Blue Mountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Waging war on woo-woo in Winnipeg
Posts: 3,929
The Cheese Shop skit would fit right in!

Mousebender Now then, some evidence please, my good man.

Wensleydale Certainly sir. What would you like?

Mousebender A bit of provenance.

Wensleydale Sorry, can't account for 70% of its apparent life span.

Mousebender Some Carbon-Fourteen then?

Wensleydale Sorry; tells the same story as the provenance.

Mousebender Scientific papers?

Wensleydale Ah. They've been on order, sir, for two weeks. I was expecting them this morning.

Mousebender How about blood stain evidence?

Wensleydale I'm afraid we never have that at the end of the week, sir. We get it fresh on Monday.

(etc)
__________________
The social illusion reigns to-day upon all the heaped-up ruins of the past, and to it belongs the future. The masses have never thirsted after truth. They turn aside from evidence that is not to their taste, preferring to deify error, if error seduce them. Gustav Le Bon, The Crowd, 1895 (from the French)
Canadian or living in Canada? PM me if you want an entry on the list of Canadians on the forum.
Blue Mountain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 06:03 PM   #4454
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...not where I seemed, nor was calculated to be...but no-one need worry...
Posts: 6,169
Originally Posted by Blue Mountain View Post
The Cheese Shop skit would fit right in!

Mousebender Now then, some evidence please, my good man.

Wensleydale Certainly sir. What would you like?

Mousebender A bit of provenance.

Wensleydale Sorry, can't account for 70% of its apparent life span.

Mousebender Some Carbon-Fourteen then?

Wensleydale Sorry; tells the same story as the provenance.

Mousebender Scientific papers?

Wensleydale Ah. They've been on order, sir, for two weeks. I was expecting them this morning.

Mousebender How about blood stain evidence?

Wensleydale I'm afraid we never have that at the end of the week, sir. We get it fresh on Monday.

(etc)
Mousebender: Figures.Predictable, really I suppose. It was an act of purest optimism to have posed any questions in the first place. Tell me:

Wensleydale: Yessir?

Mousebender: (deliberately) Have you in fact got any evidence at all.

Wensleydale: Yes, sir.

Mousebender: Really?

(pause)

Wensleydale: No. Not really, sir.
__________________
"Anything that can be accepted into science gets accepted into science." -HighRiser
"And in science the default is that you're wrong. EVERYONE is wrong. You only can be not wrong if you have evidence to back up your claim." -Dinwar
"That is not my circus; those are not my monkeys." -Howard Tayler
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 22nd December 2012, 06:37 PM   #4455
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Valhalla, one day at a time
Posts: 4,598
Mousebender Any historical evidence prior to the 14th century perhaps?

Wensleydale Ah! We have historical evidence, yessir.

Mousebender (suprised) You do! Excellent.

Wensleydale Yessir. It's, ah... it's a bit dodgy...

Mousebender Oh, I like it dodgy.

Wensleydale Well... it's very dodgy, actually, sir.

Mousebender No matter. Fetch hither les preuves d'avant le 14e siècle! Mmmwah!

Wensleydale I... think it's a bit dodgier than you'll like it, sir.

Mousebender I don't care how flipping dodgy it is. Hand it over with all speed.

Wensleydale Oooooooooohhh........! (pause)

Mousebender What now?

Wensleydale The cat's eaten it.

Mousebender (pause) Has he.

Wensleydale She, sir.
__________________
"It started badly, it tailed off a little in the middle and the less said about the end the better, but apart from that, it was excellent."
- Blackadder
The Norseman is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 23rd December 2012, 12:21 AM   #4456
pakeha
Penultimate Amazing
 
pakeha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 11,386
^
Brilliant, all of you!

Originally Posted by David Mo View Post
I think we have here the classic problem with vagueness in the sindonist language. They send us to Applied Optics paper, because it is peer reviewed and concluding. Yes, it is peer reviewed, but not concluding. In this article Adler and Heller send us to a new one by Morris et allia. They said once again that it is concluding. Not at all. “In ‘blood’ stain regions the measurements show significantly higher concentrations of iron. However, the data do not allow a unique identification of the stain's origin”. (Morris, R. A; Schwalbe, L. A. ; London, J. R. : “X-ray fluorescence investigation of the Shroud of Turin”. X-Ray Spectrometry, Volume 9, Issue 2, pages 40–47, April 1980. Subscription is required).

David Ford is actually the main source for sindonism literature about blood. (Ford, David: “The Shroud of Turin’s ‘Blood’ Images: Blood, or Paint? A History of Science Inquiry”. 2000. www.shroud.com/pdfs/ford1.pdf ). This one is not peer reviewed. Obviously, because Ford is not an expert. He was a history student in 2000. And this paper is a novelette or hagiographic pamphlet pro Adler and Heller and against McCrone. Something as Adversus haereses. The two main sources of Ford’s article are Heller, J.H. y A.D. Adler: “A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin. ” (Canadian Society of Forensic Journal, (1981)) and Heller’s book Report on the Shroud of Turin (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1983). Houghton Mifflin Hartcour is a generalist publishing. His great best seller in the last Century was Julia Child's Mastering the Art of French Cooking. Their first aim is student books.

To check this bibliography is difficult. The 1981 paper seems more serious but there is only a paper version. Not easy to find. If you read with care the Ford’s pdf you must distinguish between original ideas from Adler&Heller and “clever” deductions made by Ford. It is neither easy because novelistic author’s style.

In essence, I think there are two main points in the cause of blood in the shroud: High level of iron in the stains and hydrazine test. And there are two main points against the blood: bright colour and absence of some classic components of blood as potassium. All this with respect to chemical and microscopical evidence and take for granted the accuracy of the studies. I am not able to check this last point.

Other archaeological and forensic evidences against blood can be argued. But this is another subject.

Addenda: I am working on blood topic for my blog La sombra en el sudario. Chemistry and Physics are not my strong points. If someone wants to comment about or correct something I have written above this will be good for me. Thanks.
Great work, DM.
Thoughtful, painstaking and well written.
May the little old man in a red suit bring you prezzies to tide you over til the arrival of the Reyes Magos

O Pharaoh, please let us know when we may start placing bets on the nature of Jabba's probable reply to DM's post.
O Pharaoh
pakeha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 08:29 AM   #4457
Jabba
Graduate Poster
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Schenectady, NY
Posts: 1,945
Originally Posted by Acleron View Post
Sarcasm?

You have asked for questions before, just about everyone said the same thing; address the C14 assays. You refused to do so. You continued to refuse to do so. You are still refusing to do so.

So just who is being sarcastic by denying that you have been asked?
Acleron,

- My main reason for thinking that the carbon dating is flawed is what I'm calling the "indirect" evidence -- evidence against the results of the dating rather than the process of the dating.
- I do think that there is plenty of "direct" reason for questioning the validity of the overall process in this case, but for now, these seem to be sort of secondary, and basically allow for invalidity more than they require invalidity.
- So anyway, I think that I have a bunch of premises which, if true, lead to the conclusion that the carbon dating was wrong. While, the premise that the stains are composed of real blood does not, itself, require that the dating be invalid, it does in my opinion make for a good first step in that direction.

- What I'm saying is that my focus on the blood issue is totally appropriate to addressing the carbon dating issue. In other words, I am trying to do as requested by you guys -- it's just that I've been slow, and have recently been even slower.

--- Jabba
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Tra gli argomenti, colui che ricorre alla meno sarcasmo dovrebbe essere selezionata." Jabba's Razor
Jabba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 08:42 AM   #4458
abaddon
Philosopher
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,426
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Acleron,

- My main reason for thinking that the carbon dating is flawed is what I'm calling the "indirect" evidence -- evidence against the results of the dating rather than the process of the dating.
Present it then. You claim to have it. Let's see it.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I do think that there is plenty of "direct" reason for questioning the validity of the overall process in this case, but for now, these seem to be sort of secondary, and basically allow for invalidity more than they require invalidity.
You have failed to present those reasons, you simply seek to have your assumption that your reasons are valid, and should be accepted.
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- So anyway, I think that I have a bunch of premises which, if true, lead to the conclusion that the carbon dating was wrong. While, the premise that the stains are composed of real blood does not, itself, require that the dating be invalid, it does in my opinion make for a good first step in that direction.
Veiled assumption that blood stains exist. They don't

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- What I'm saying is that my focus on the blood issue is totally appropriate to addressing the carbon dating issue. In other words, I am trying to do as requested by you guys -- it's just that I've been slow, and have recently been even slower.
Wrong. You have simply been trying to slide your assumptions under the door.

Have you anything to reply to the actual carbon dating or not?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 08:50 AM   #4459
Akhenaten
Heretic Pharaoh
 
Akhenaten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Pi-Broadford, Australia
Posts: 27,981
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Acleron,

- My main reason for thinking that the carbon dating is flawed is what I'm calling the "indirect" evidence -- evidence against the results of the dating rather than the process of the dating.


This is mainly why you fail.

Apart from anything else, what you're calling "indirect" evidence is nothing more than what you hope sounds more credible than "stuff I believe no matter what the evidence says".



Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I do think that there is plenty of "direct" reason for questioning the validity of the overall process in this case, but for now, these seem to be sort of secondary, and basically allow for invalidity more than they require invalidity.


This is another major reason why you fail.

You're pretending that the the single most important thing you need to do - demonstrate that the C14 results are flawed in and of themselves - is less important than convincing everyone of the truth of your unevidenced fantasies about bluuurd and whatnot.



Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- So anyway, I think that I have a bunch of premises which, if true, lead to the conclusion that the carbon dating was wrong. While, the premise that the stains are composed of real blood does not, itself, require that the dating be invalid, it does in my opinion make for a good first step in that direction.


Balderdash.

Unless you can demonstrate that the C14 results are wrong then the very best you can ever hope to do is suggest that a 14th Century artefact has bluuurd on it.

And that's nothing like a step in the direction of providing evidence for your dead Jeebus theory.



Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- What I'm saying is that my focus on the blood issue is totally appropriate to addressing the carbon dating issue.


Of course you're saying that, and it's why you're destined to repeat your failures forever.



Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
In other words, I am trying to do as requested by you guys -- it's just that I've been slow, and have recently been even slower.

--- Jabba


You aren't doing what's being requested of you. You've got a half-baked idea that bluuurd on the shroud = resurrected Jesus and because that's what you want to believe you are impervious to actual evidence.
__________________


Life is mostly Froth and Bubble - Adam Lindsay Gordon

The Australasian Skeptics Forum

Last edited by Akhenaten; 26th December 2012 at 08:58 AM. Reason: speeling
Akhenaten is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 08:58 AM   #4460
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by Jabba
- My main reason for thinking that the carbon dating is flawed is what I'm calling the "indirect" evidence -- evidence against the results of the dating rather than the process of the dating.
it's also non-existent. You've had over a hundred pages to provide any valid data to support your nonsense, and have failed utterly. The greatest support for your theories has been given (and soundly dismantled) by the opposition. You've lost this argument by defaulting.

Quote:
- I do think that there is plenty of "direct" reason for questioning the validity of the overall process in this case, but for now, these seem to be sort of secondary, and basically allow for invalidity more than they require invalidity.
It has been demonstrated that you know nothing of C14 sampling procedures, that your demands are unreasonable, and that nothing anyone did would ever be sufficient for you to accept it. It is dishonest (there's no other word for it) to say that the most well-document and well-controled C14 sample ever taken wasn't rigorous enough. And those are your BEST arguments against the process. Most of the rest of your arguments are made-up nonsense.

Quote:
- So anyway, I think that I have a bunch of premises which, if true, lead to the conclusion that the carbon dating was wrong.
There are two problems with this. First, they don't. Until you can prove the C14 dating wrong at best you can only end up arguing that the C14 dating is a mystery (weird things do sometimes happen). Second, you've been unable to put forth any such true premises. You've tried one, and it was soundly defeated.

Quote:
While, the premise that the stains are composed of real blood does not, itself, require that the dating be invalid, it does in my opinion make for a good first step in that direction.
Hardly, for reasons that pretty much everyone else at this point has outlined and which you've steadfastly ignored (as an aside, you really should question why your side requires you to ignore so much, Jabba). And it's telling that you consider this a premise rather than a conclusion. You ASSUME that the stains are blood. You didn't even read your own references (after TWENTY YEARS OF RESEARCH!!). You WANT this to be true--but you have no data to support such a conclusion, even if it's the right one, so you've dishonestly attempted to put it into a position where data are unnecessary. Sorry, Jabba, but those of us familiar with science have no patience for that sort of trickery.

Quote:
- What I'm saying is that my focus on the blood issue is totally appropriate to addressing the carbon dating issue. In other words, I am trying to do as requested by you guys -- it's just that I've been slow, and have recently been even slower.
We've shown your "premise" to be false. You have two options: abandon your premise and find a new one that might work better, or admit that you're wrong. Continuing to ignore the facts and criticisms presented here merely shows that you are unwilling to engage in honest discourse.

I'd appologize for harping on your honesty, but we've given you well over a hundred pages and you continue to play the same games. You're not an honest person, Jabba. And this directly relates to the thread: you want us to trust that you have some long, complex train of thought that you're trying to express (though you flat-out refuse to do so). Your track record, however, suggests that any statement you make is more likely to be false than true. So I'm going to go ahead and just say that I don't believe you actually have any idea how blood stains can possibly disprove C14 dating, and that you're simply throwing arguments at us at random, in hopes that we finally capitulate under the onslaught.
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 09:00 AM   #4461
Resume
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 9,714
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
So anyway, I think that I have a bunch of premises which, if true, lead to the conclusion that the carbon dating was wrong.
I can come up with a bunch of premises that if true, might cause monkeys to fly from my ass. I think your premises come from a similar orifice. I think that after all these posts, these pages, that's all you have left.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 09:05 AM   #4462
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Jabba, I have a proposition for you. The ceiling in my apartment has a blood stain on it (popcorn ceilings are hard to clean, and I was a tad distracted at the time). Are you willing to say that my ceiling is the burial shroud of the one true Son of God?

If not, please explain why.

Then I'll tell you the punchline.
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 09:11 AM   #4463
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
You guys are not experts in the field of forensics so leave it to the experts.

Mystery solved? Turin Shroud linked to Resurrection of Christ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...of-Christ.html
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 09:19 AM   #4464
abaddon
Philosopher
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,426
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You guys are not experts in the field of forensics so leave it to the experts.

Mystery solved? Turin Shroud linked to Resurrection of Christ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...of-Christ.html
This has been a long thread. I suggest you read all of it before attempting to re-introduce long debunked arguments. I know how you like "research".
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 09:27 AM   #4465
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You guys are not experts in the field of forensics so leave it to the experts.
This isn't a question fo forensics, but rather of archaeology. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that makes you too ignorant of this situation to be taken seriously. Jabba gets a pass only because we're willing to give him one, for our own reasons. I see no reason to give a second incompetant a pass in this thread.

If you want my qualifications in archaeology, read the thread--all 100+ pages of it. You'll find the answer therein.
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 10:01 AM   #4466
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by Dinwar View Post
This isn't a question fo forensics, but rather of archaeology. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge that makes you too ignorant of this situation to be taken seriously. Jabba gets a pass only because we're willing to give him one, for our own reasons. I see no reason to give a second incompetant a pass in this thread.

If you want my qualifications in archaeology, read the thread--all 100+ pages of it. You'll find the answer therein.
Nothing personal. But this is really a job for forensic experts. According to Forbes. Archeology and anthropology are the worst college majors and the least valuable of the 10 worst college majors.
The 10 Worst College Majors
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagou...ollege-majors/
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 10:07 AM   #4467
abaddon
Philosopher
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,426
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Nothing personal. But this is really a job for forensic experts. According to Forbes.
Wrong. According to Georgetown University. Forbes just wrote an article about their findings.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Archeology and anthropology are the worst college majors and the least valuable of the 10 worst college majors.
The 10 Worst College Majors
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagou...ollege-majors/
In terms of earnings, money, prestige. Guess what, people chose careers on more than just a money basis.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 10:13 AM   #4468
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Nothing personal. But this is really a job for forensic experts. According to Forbes. Archeology and anthropology are the worst college majors and the least valuable of the 10 worst college majors.
Whether or not archaeology and anthropology will make their practitioners money (the key criteria for determining what was and was not a valuable major in that study) is irrelevant to whether or not they are the appropriate fields to adderss these issues. We are talking about an archaeological artifact. This really is a job for archaeologists. Forensics experts can contribute, but they must necessarily take a far, far back seat to the appropriate experts because forensics experts do not regularly deal with issues of taphonomy, nor are they at all familiar with the cultural practices of the peoples at those times (or at least, we can't assume they are).

You are, as usual, trying to weasle out of the necessity to use logic and reason in these discussions. Red herrings and non sequitors don't work in scientific debates.
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 10:15 AM   #4469
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Flanders/Nederland border.
Posts: 35,445
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You guys are not experts in the field of forensics so leave it to the experts.

Mystery solved? Turin Shroud linked to Resurrection of Christ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...of-Christ.html
Long debunked. There is more to research than the ability to use Google.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 10:16 AM   #4470
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Flanders/Nederland border.
Posts: 35,445
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Nothing personal. But this is really a job for forensic experts. According to Forbes. Archeology and anthropology are the worst college majors and the least valuable of the 10 worst college majors.
The 10 Worst College Majors
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagou...ollege-majors/
What are your qualifications?
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:00 AM   #4471
Wolrab
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Beautiful Finger Lakes
Posts: 2,076
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
What are your qualifications?
Ah. Well... I attended Juilliard... I'm a graduate of the Harvard business school. I travel quite extensively. I lived through the Black Plague and had a pretty good time during that. I've seen the EXORCIST ABOUT A HUNDRED AND SIXTY-SEVEN TIMES, AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER EVERY SINGLE TIME I SEE IT... NOT TO MENTION THE FACT THAT YOU'RE TALKING TO A DEAD GUY... NOW WHAT DO YOU THINK? You think I'm qualified?[/Beetlejuice]
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:11 AM   #4472
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by Dinwar View Post
Whether or not archaeology and anthropology will make their practitioners money (the key criteria for determining what was and was not a valuable major in that study) is irrelevant to whether or not they are the appropriate fields to adderss these issues. We are talking about an archaeological artifact. This really is a job for archaeologists. Forensics experts can contribute, but they must necessarily take a far, far back seat to the appropriate experts because forensics experts do not regularly deal with issues of taphonomy, nor are they at all familiar with the cultural practices of the peoples at those times (or at least, we can't assume they are).

You are, as usual, trying to weasle out of the necessity to use logic and reason in these discussions. Red herrings and non sequitors don't work in scientific debates.
We are talking about a bunch of amateurs that fumbled the test and years later retracted. If the job industry sees archeology and anthropology as the worst and least valuable of the 10 worst college majors. That isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of what they do.

The shroud of Turin is one of the most studied, investigated piece of ancient artifacts. It has baffled even the best of experts. There are no scientific explanations only conjectures and guesswork. The science available is immature and drowning with amateurs. The Shroud continues to inspire millions. It will take more than a few quacks to shred that aura away.
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:15 AM   #4473
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Flanders/Nederland border.
Posts: 35,445
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
The shroud of Turin is one of the most studied, investigated piece of ancient artifacts. It has baffled even the best of experts. There are no scientific explanations only conjectures and guesswork. The science available is immature and drowning with amateurs. The Shroud continues to inspire millions. It will take more than a few quacks to shred that aura away.
No. If millions want to believe in a painted cloth, then good luck to them. I prefer reality.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:16 AM   #4474
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Flanders/Nederland border.
Posts: 35,445
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
The shroud of Turin is one of the most studied, investigated piece of ancient artifacts. I
And has been shown to be a fake.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:30 AM   #4475
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by justintime
If the job industry sees archeology and anthropology as the worst and least valuable of the 10 worst college majors. That isn't exactly a ringing endorsement of what they do.
It's quite difficult to imagine a stupider statement than this in regards to archaeology. The recent Stoned Ape thread comes close at times, but this tops it.

The issue isn't that archaeologists do a bad job--but that the job they DO do isn't worth much money, even done well. Archaeologists have two choices: becoming a university professor or a shovel bum. A rare few rise to the level of middle-management in environmental firms. Most work through temp agencies, often traveling hundreds of miles between jobs and frequently spending months without paychecks.

Bear in mind, I say this as someone who's actually done the job, and who commonly works alongside these folks. I actually know what they do for a living because I've done it and I've worked alongside those who do (quite literally, in fact--my job is quite similar, though the far fewer practitioners keep it off your list). If you want to argue this point with me, you'll have to provide actual data, because I'm working with direct and well-documented observations.

NONE OF THAT has ANY impact on the research archaeologists do. Period. It is nothing but intentional misinformation on your part to even suggest that it does. And NONE OF THAT has ANY impact on whether or not the proper field of study to analyze an arhcaeological artifact is archaeology. Period.

Quote:
The shroud of Turin is one of the most studied, investigated piece of ancient artifacts. It has baffled even the best of experts.
I'll grant you the first statement, though I have my doubts (remember, buildings are artifacts). The second one remains, after well over a hundred pages, unsupported. Prove it, or shut up.

Quote:
There are no scientific explanations only conjectures and guesswork.
This is true, provided one ignores the numerous historical and scientific accounts for the shroud's origin and the fact that it was revealed to be a hoax in the Middle Ages. There's also the C14 data, which conclusively proves that it's a Medieval artifact of some sort (of WHAT sort may be a bit foggy, but that's another issue entirely). No one, including you and Jabba, has yet said anything that calls that dating into question.

Quote:
The science available is immature and drowning with amateurs.
The C14 dating--the single most well-documented sample ever taken and analyzed by the best labs on Earth--was done by amateurs? Or is it more likely that you, like Jabba, haven't actually looked into the question? And radiometric dating is hardly an immature science drowing with amateurs. It's a well-established science, rigorously practiced and done under strict controls.

ONE side is awash in amateurs, sure. It isn't the side that says it's a fake, though. It's YOUR side.

Furthermore, none of this supports anything about the shroud. Even if everything you said (with the exception of your dishonest attempt at a smear campaign against archaeology as a whole) was true, at best we're left with "I dunno"--which is quite obviously NOT the conclusion you want us to draw.

Quote:
The Shroud continues to inspire millions.
So do the Beatles. So does Elvis. For that matter, so does Impressionism, Cubism, and whatever you call what passes for painting today. Football inspires far more people than the shroud. Just because millions are inspired by it doesn't mean it's actually worth anything.

Quote:
It will take more than a few quacks to shred that aura away.
See, this is where you openly admit that your attempt to manufacture doubt isn't actually honest. An honest person would say "We don't know" and leave it at that. Jabba even has the courtesy to leave it at "We don't know, therefore I'm right". You, on the other hand, have the umitigated audacity to say "We don't know, therefore I'm right, and anyone who disagrees with me is a fraud."

Add to that the audacity of ignoring over a hundred pages of solid, well-documented evidence. And the audacity to claim not only expertise, but greater expertise than the experts, in a field you have not studied (which is what you calling archaeologists as a whole quacks amounts to). Add to that multiple posts without a shred of evidence backing up anything.

Tell me, justintime: What possible reason do we have for taking you seriously?
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:45 AM   #4476
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
No. If millions want to believe in a painted cloth, then good luck to them. I prefer reality.
You got it backwards. Millions don't believe a bunch of amateurs have identified the painted cloth properly. And when the job industry identifies these amateurs archeologist and anthropologist as the worst and least valuable of the 10 worst college majors. It is not rocket science to reject their absurd half baked claims.
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:48 AM   #4477
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: On the Flanders/Nederland border.
Posts: 35,445
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You got it backwards. Millions don't believe a bunch of amateurs have identified the painted cloth properly. And when the job industry identifies these amateurs archeologist and anthropologist as the worst and least valuable of the 10 worst college majors. It is not rocket science to reject their absurd half baked claims.
You obviously know nothing about the research done on the shroud. Take some time and catch up.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 11:48 AM   #4478
Dinwar
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,665
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You got it backwards. Millions don't believe a bunch of amateurs have identified the painted cloth properly.
Prove that the people involved were amateurs. Their names and publications are listed in this thread. They certainly know more about archaeology than you do--the only information you seem to have on it is a misunderstanding of a publication on how profitable the profession is.

Quote:
And when the job industry identifies these amateurs archeologist and anthropologist as the worst and least valuable of the 10 worst college majors.
I have already explained this fallacy. Your willful refusal to accept basic logic does not negatge it.

Second, you've yet to prove that they ARE amateurs. In fact, you are admitting that they are NOT amateurs--if they're professionals with a college education, they are by definition NOT amateurs. They are professionals.

Quote:
It is not rocket science to reject their absurd half baked claims.
True--it's archaeology, a field you continually show you know nothing of.

Here's a hint: Instead of this smear campaign, how about you look at the ACTUAL EVIDENCE?
__________________
GENERATION 8: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.
Dinwar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 12:07 PM   #4479
Acleron
Master Poster
 
Acleron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In a beautifully understandable universe
Posts: 2,290
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
You obviously know nothing about the research done on the shroud. Take some time and catch up.
I've noticed that facts, evidence and logic have little to do with JustinTime.
Acleron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 26th December 2012, 12:09 PM   #4480
John Jones
Philosopher
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 5,785
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You guys are not experts in the field of forensics so leave it to the experts.

Mystery solved? Turin Shroud linked to Resurrection of Christ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...of-Christ.html


The subject of the article you linked is not an expert in the field of forrensics, and neither are you.

When you're in the hole, it's time to stop digging.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

JREF Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:39 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.