Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Krowbar who wrote (20445)	4/15/1998 3:13:00 AM
From: Grainne	Respond to of 108807

Del, the article I urled specifically discussed the possibility of using that technology. It could not be the case, if I recall correctly, because the pattern on the cloth, in terms of layers affected, would be different than the images on the Shroud actually are. Also, that in no way explains the Cloth of Oviedo, which is clearly mentioned in historical records of the seventh century, and which matches the stains on the Shroud.

To: Krowbar who wrote (20445)	4/15/1998 3:05:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

Well there has been another program on the Shroud which looks into the possibility that Leonardo created the shroud, and that it may in fact be a self image. Ooooooh noooooooooo. I know exactly how this idiocy started. About five years ago a woman--a producer for national TV here in Italy--wrote to Augusto Marinoni (then president of Raccolta Vinciana) explaining her "theory". She had some really GREAT "evidence": like, the shroud may originally have come from France, and Leo died in France. Marinoni, a hilariously funny old geezer, made the mistake of replying to her letter, saying, more or less, that this was utter nonsense. Since she was, and is, a typical Leo Looney, she sent back a 25-page screed outlining her ideas. We fell about laughing when M told us the story (unfortunately he'd trashed the second letter; I think these things should be preserved). As it happened, though, she eventually managed to convince God knows who; her book was solemnly published last year. We're still laughing. And then there are the nutcases who believe that the Mona Lisa is a self-portrait of Leonardo in drag. This "idea" resurfaces every thirty years or so. More often lately: the computer imaging people are really into it. They haven't got a clue: simply don't understand that the proportions of Mona's face are the same as those of Leo's own in the Turin self-portrait (drawing; probably really is a self-portrait, but we don't know for sure) because Leo was interested in the theory of human proportion. I could go on. And on. The Louvre has a correspondence file for each of their Leonardos, and these files are a SCREAM. I spent days reading 'em about eight years ago. Like a few other artists, poor Leo attracts lunatics.