[Above: Giuseppe Enrie's 1931 negative (of a negative therefore positive) photograph of the forehead of the man on the Shroud of Turin, showing the epsilon or reversed "3" (i.e. on the Shroud itself) bloodstain: Wilson, I. & Schwortz, B., "The Turin Shroud: The Illustrated Evidence," Michael O'Mara: London, 2000, p.28]
Further confirmation that these bloodstains on the Shroud are indeed blood is that "independently of Drs Heller and Adler" a "pathologist Dr Pier Luigi Baima-Bollone" has "not only confirmed it to be blood, but confidently identified it as the AB group" which "is comparatively rare among Europeans ... its incidence is 18 per cent among Jewish populations of the present-day Near East":
"In fact, quite independently of Drs Heller and Adler, other findings have served to confirm that what appears to be blood genuinely is blood. For instance the Italian pathologist Dr Pier Luigi Baima-Bollone, who has carried out thousands of autopsies, and who has had more Shroud `blood' sample than was accorded to Dr Adler, has not only confirmed it to be blood, but confidently identified it as of the AB group. [Baima-Bollone, P., Jorio, M. & Massaro, A.L., "Identification of the Group of the Traces of Human Blood on the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, Issue 6, March 1983, pp.3-6] Although this group is comparatively rare among Europeans and is found in only 3.2 per cent of the world's population as a whole, its incidence is 18 per cent among Jewish populations of the present-day Near East. [Garza-Valdes, L., "The DNA of God?," Doubleday: New York, 1999, p.39] Caution is needed, however, since some researchers have noted a tendency among blood samples more than several centuries old always to test AB." (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.77).
However, while this is evidence that the image on the Shroud is that of a Jew, and therefore consistent with being Jesus, as Wilson & Schwortz indicate above, there may be "a tendency among blood samples more than several centuries old always to test AB." If this is in fact the case, then still the value of this evidence remains that it is any blood group at all, because that is more evidence that the bloodstains on the Shroud are really blood and not paint or other pigment as `skeptics' like McCrone and Nickell have claimed (see part #8) .
Not only do the bloodstains on the Shroud have a blood group, but they also have " X and Y chromosomes, indicating that the individual from whom it came was male" and also making it "quite impossible if the Shroud `blood' were merely iron oxide as contended by Walter McCrone":
"But arguably of the greatest importance, even though they are as yet far from fully secure, are studies, both in Italy and the United States, which, completely independently of each other, have identified DNA in the Shroud `blood'. On the afternoon of 21 April 1988, just a few hours after having cut off the snippets of the Shroud used for radiocarbon dating, the Italian microscopist Dr Giovanni Riggi took a 1.5 mm `blood' sample from the back-of-the-head region. In June 1993 he provided some of this sample to a visiting American microbiology professor, Dr Leoncio Garza-Valdes, who took it back for analysis at the University of Texas' Center for Advanced DNA Technologies at San Antonio, Texas. There the laboratory director, Dr Victor Tryon, and his technician wife, Nancy Mitchell Tryon, quickly established that the sample was human blood of the AB group, just as Baima-Bollone had before them. They also determined that it had both X and Y chromosomes, indicating that the individual from whom it came was male. Three unmistakable gene segments were identified, beta globin from chromosome 11, amelogenin X from chromosome X and amelogenin Y from chromosome Y, a finding quite impossible if the Shroud `blood' were merely iron oxide as contended by Walter McCrone." (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, pp.77-78).
Contamination can virtually be ruled out in this case because, "the Center's work often has to be presented in courts of law, they have the most stringent controls to guard against it":
"Such is the importance and interest value of this claim that I decided to check its credibility independently with American-born specialist in ancient DNA, Dr Thomas Loy, who happens to be conveniently near to me at Queensland University's Centre for Molecular and Cellular Biology .... He confirmed to me that he finds absolutely no cause to doubt the Tryons' findings. Thus, as I learned, the DNA in blood and tissue from archaeological finds even several thousands of years old is now quite routinely being analysed and evaluated. ... Unlike in the case of McCrone-type microscopic analysis, in which so much depends upon the microscopist's eye, DNA analysis is instrument based and a far more exact science. The amelogenin X and Y genes, as found by the Tryons, are absent from bacteria and fungi, and genuinely suggestive of a human source. .... As Loy stressed, the one major factor that everyone has to be on guard for when dealing with DNA, both ancient and modern, is that of contamination. However, when I put this point directly to Nancy Tryon she assured me that because the Center's work often has to be presented in courts of law, they have the most stringent controls to guard against it. Only if someone secondary to the original individual whose blood appears on the Shroud had happened to bleed again onto the very same spot could serious contamination have been introduced - and (nuns pricking their fingers while carrying out repairs excepted), that scenario has to be considered reasonably unlikely." (Wilson, I., "The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World's Most Sacred Relic is Real," Simon & Schuster: New York NY, 1998, pp.91-92).
Also (not mentioned by Wilson), if there was other DNA in the Shroud's bloodstained areas, then there should be more than one individual's DNA, it would not be so degraded being more recent, and it would be less likely to be male, since those who would be most likely to bleed on the Shroud would have been nuns, although they would have worn gloves and moreover repairs were not in the bloodstained areas.
Even further evidence for the Shroud's bloodstains are really blood and not "cunningly painted" is that an "archaeologist Dr Eugenia Nitowski" claimed that in the "back area of the Shroud `blood' stains, found ... a microscopic muscle fragment that had ... been dislodged by one of the scourge strokes":
"Ancillary to the blood itself, during the 1980s the Utah-based archaeologist Dr Eugenia Nitowski, studying sticky tape number 3DB, taken from the small-of-the-back area of the Shroud `blood' stains, found what she has confidently identified as a microscopic muscle fragment that had arguably been dislodged by one of the scourge strokes. Also, as earlier mentioned, among the same blood from the back of the head have been found tubules of wood. Arguably these were transferred from the wood of the cross as the man of the Shroud desperately pressed his head against it in an attempt to relieve at least something of the horrifying pains in his hands and feet." (Wilson & Schwortz, 2000, p.77).
although I have been unable to confirm this from any other source.
The final nail in the coffin of all forgery theories (although it was one of the earlier arguments against them) is the physiological and anatomical perfection of the bloodflows (as well as all the wounds). As the late physician Dr. David Willis noted, "The most striking of these flows is one in the shape of a reversed three" (see above), which is "entirely faithful to scientific and physiological detail" such that, as biology professor and artist Paul Vignon pointed out in 1902, "No painter, in his most elaborate work, has ever risen to such exactitude" (my emphasis):
"The first clear traces of spilled blood are again from a group of wounds that we have no trouble in identifying. In David Willis's precise medical terminology: `... Turning to the front, there are similar puncture wounds with their counter-drawings of bloodflows but not so numerous as on the back. There are four or five that start from the top of the forehead moving down towards the eyes and the remainder are tangled in the masses of hair framing the face. The most striking of these flows is one in the shape of a reversed three and repays detailed study, so true to life is it. It starts just below the hairline to the left of the midline from a single wound; the flow then moves down to the medial part of the arch above the left eye following a meandering course obliquely and outwards. As the stream descends it broadens and alters course twice, finally building up and spreading out horizontally to the mesial line. Immediately below but separate is a `tear' of blood close to the eyebrow, which is presumably part of the same flow, or possibly from an independent wound. The reason for the meandering course of this vivid mark indicates that it met some obstruction in its downward course, and most likely this was due to the reflex contraction of the muscles of the brow from the pain of the wounds, furrowing the surface.' [Willis, D., unpublished notes, c.1976] As Dr. Willis found, it is quite impossible to talk sensibly about wounds such as these except in the context of a crown, or as it seems most likely to have been, a cap of thorns as described in the mockery of Christ as King of the Jews. Equally, as one reads such a description from a qualified physician, one cannot fail to be caught up by his own conviction of the sheer physiological logic of these wounds. Willis was not alone in this regard. Vignon too was fascinated by the thorn wounds, particularly the one shaped like a numeral three, which he too found entirely faithful to scientific and physiological detail. As he remarked, `No painter, in his most elaborate work, has ever risen to such exactitude.' [Vignon, P., "The Shroud of Christ," London, 1902, p.30]." (Wilson, I., "The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, pp.23-24. Emphasis original)
Indeed, "venous blood flows can even be distinguished from arterial blood flows in some of the bloodstains on the man's forehead" and yet "the difference between arterial and venous blood was not even discovered until" 1616 (my emphasis):
"Not only are all the above tests consistent with the presence of blood, but venous blood flows can even be distinguished from arterial blood flows in some of the bloodstains on the man's forehead. In general, venous blood appears denser and darker red, and it flows more slowly than arterial blood. In large wounds or wounds that puncture a vessel and produce a large blood flow, venous blood slowly thickens as it descends because it takes a few minutes for the coagulation process to begin and a clot to form. The large epsilon-shaped clot in the middle of the man's forehead is a good example of a large venous blood flow. .... In contrast to blood from a vein, arterial blood spurts from a wound, driven by the pumping action of the heart. ... Dr. Rodante, who has made one of the most extensive studies of the forehead wounds to date, has identified the origins of many of the head wounds based on the size or coagulation pattern of blood flows on the skin. (The arterial or venous origins of blood flows matted in the hair, and not free-flowing on skin, are impossible to determine.) As examples, the epsilon-shaped forehead clot lies exactly over the frontal vein, while the arterial wound numbered AI in figure 21 precisely corresponds with the frontal branch of the superficial temple artery. [Rodante, S., "The Coronation of Thorns in the Light of the Shroud," Shroud Spectrum International, Issue 1, December 1981, pp.5-24] According to Rodante, `The perfect correspondency of the forehead dots imprinted on the [Shroud], overlaying as they do the vein and the artery in mirror image, gives us the certainty that the linen covered the corpse of a man, who, while living, suffered the lesion of these blood vessels:' [Ibid, p.8] ... These examples of distinctly venous and arterial wounds indicate that the injuries evident on the man's image could have occurred only on an actual human body. Regardless of technique, no artist, especially one working in the Middle Ages, has ever represented the distinction between venous and arterial blood so accurately. .... In fact, the difference between arterial and venous blood was not even discovered until 1593 [actually it was 1616 - SJ], more than 230 [250 - SJ] years after some allege that the Shroud image was painted. The epsilon-shaped clot on the man's forehead contains another realistic detail. As the blood flow descended, it broadened and changed course twice. Physicians believe this was because forehead muscles spontaneously contract when they are injured. The forehead, temple, and scalp contain a web of nerves that is highly sensitive to pain. [Ibid] Thus, contracting forehead muscles would be a natural reaction to the intense pain caused by having more than thirty head wounds." (Antonacci, M., "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.25-26).
when "William Harvey" who "attended ... Cambridge University ... from 1593", "In a 1616 lecture ... first stated his theories about the circulation of blood" and "Finally, in 1628 ... published his book, An Anatomical Exercise Concerning the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals, i.e. "more than" 250 "years after some allege that the Shroud image was painted" (my emphasis)!
And so again the real counterpart of the "Flat Earth Society" is not those who "fight for the authenticity of the shroud," but rather those like the late Prof. Edward Hall and Prof. Robert Hedges (both of the Oxford lab which was one of the three which radiocarbon dated the Shroud "between 1260 and 1390" AD in 1988) who fight against "the authenticity of the shroud," in their absurd claim that in "the 14th century ... Someone just got a bit of linen, faked it up and flogged it"' (my emphasis)!:
"In the late 1970s, he was quick to see the value of the revolutionary new method of radiocarbon dating then being developed (called accelerator mass spectrometry or AMS dating) and became fully committed to establishing the method at Oxford. In the early days of setting up the AMS facility at Oxford, he could be found crawling inside the accelerator tank, or discussing design modifications, or even sweeping the floor. Such total involvement got its reward especially in his participation in the dating of the Shroud of Turin in 1988. Cardinal Anastasio Ballestrero, the Archbishop of Turin, had authorised the removal of samples of the shroud for testing by three laboratories: in Arizona, Zurich - and Oxford. Hall's laboratory dated its sample to between 1260 and 1390. The mix of good science, intricate instrumentation, the attention of the world's press, the ambivalence of the religious authorities and sheer importance of the outcome for so many people appealed to him immensely; he also took pleasure in, as he saw it, the debunking of any conviction that could not be rationally demonstrated. `There was a multi-million-pound business in making forgeries during the 14th century,' he bluntly told a British Museum press conference. `Someone just got a bit of linen, faked it up and flogged it.' And again, `Some people may continue to fight for the authenticity of the shroud, like the Flat Earth Society, but this settles it all as far as we are concerned." (Hedges, R., "Obituary: Professor Edward Hall," The Independent, August 16, 2001)
Stephen E. Jones, BSc. (Biology).
Leviticus 26:21-26. 21" 'If you remain hostile toward me and refuse to listen to me, I will multiply your afflictions seven times over, as your sins deserve. 22I will send wild animals against you, and they will rob you of your children, destroy your cattle and make you so few in number that your roads will be deserted. 23" 'If in spite of these things you do not accept my correction but continue to be hostile toward me, 24I myself will be hostile toward you and will afflict you for your sins seven times over. 25And I will bring the sword upon you to avenge the breaking of the covenant. When you withdraw into your cities, I will send a plague among you, and you will be given into enemy hands. 26When I cut off your supply of bread, ten women will be able to bake your bread in one oven, and they will dole out the bread by weight. You will eat, but you will not be satisfied.