Body features were identified by template matching.
The face and probably also the hands are visible on the back of the Turin Shroud, but not features related to the dorsal image. Right, except he had to paint it without paint or pigment or dyes or colorants of any kind.
I am not a physicist either, but I know what sort of scientist Fanti is and I know what sort of scientist Ray Roger, UCLA fellow and former head of the bomb explosives group for the Los Alamos Laboratory, is, and they agree emphatically that this rules out forgery or any form of artistic or crafty technique.
Fanti’s words are clear: “It is extremely difficult to make a fake with these features.”In fact, the skunkworks group has been working with the double superficiality of the images for some time now.
Therefore, image processing, developed ad hoc, was necessary to highlight body features.
This was based on convolution with Gaussian filters, summation of images, and filtering in spatial frequency by direct and inverse bidimensional Fourier transformations.
I’m not a physicist, but as I read the original article, I think it’s relatively neutral as to whether or not the shroud is genuine.
The color is within a thin carbohydrate film that is 180 to 600 nanometers thick on fibers that average 13 microns in diameter (human hair is 100 microns).Other possibilities, without regard to miraculous causation, would include an ionizing radiation or corona discharge — though some physicists have real problems with this.The differences, such as the nose on the reverse side which doesn’t show the same extension as the front, are probably completely due to chemical reaction differences, image inhibition by bloodstains, and diffusion of amine reactants if the catalyst or the reactant is gaseous.Sorry, shroudie, I keep forgetting that one should assume a miraculous, supernatural theory is true, then work backwards to prove it’s validity by ignoring or discrediting those nasty secular humanist scientific techniques and inconvenient historical records.But we minions of Satan are always planting those nasty doubts to test the faithful. I have to go plant some more dinosaur bones to plague the creation science folks!If anything, I would think that would cast additional doubt on the shroud. However, I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ.What I find especially humorous is that many hysterical denials will come from Fundamentalists decrying “false idols”. just paint one side, hold up to the light, paint the other side. I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ.To say it’s a fake without any idea of HOW it could be faked is simply denial.Thus far, no one has any idea how the image could have been faked.CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Shroud of Turin PBS “Secrets of the Dead” Buries the Truth About Turin Shroud You need to read more carefully, because on page 500-501 the authors state: “It should be noted that the image of the face, bs, is found in the same position as the corresponding one on the front, in all its detail, and on the same scale, with non-detectable relative rotation within the range of measurement uncertainty (3% for the scale factor, 3 degrees for relative rotations).”In other words, no significant difference in image position with respect to front and back surfaces. I guess you don’t want readers to see that your sources are an article that was written in 1908 and copyrighted in 1912, since superceded in the Catholic Encyclopedia in 1968 (still outdated but nowhere nearly as biased as the one YOU like to cite).And that the other is to Joe Nickell, Ph D in Art and English, no science to his name, a professional “debunker” with a book to sell… Amusing that the “credulous” shroudie is the one providing technical analysis and scientific documentation, and the “realist” debunker must make do with sarcasm, innuendo and intentionally ignoring established facts…I would have said that it is extremely easy to make a fake with these features, since by the 21st c.