Theories on Why Atheists are met with Hostility

[MaxGrit]

Yes, he nailed the idiotic proposition that he actually knows what he is talking about. In fact, he nailed it so hard that only idiots believe it.



I never tried because I didn't see a reason to try to believe everything people said. That must be why I figured out that Santa didn't exist so early.



Newsflash, your lack of ability to believe in no way proves you are right about anything.



Yet, here you are, proclaiming your lack of resentment with idiotic ramblings and stupid platitudes.



Hate to break this to you, but people are free to stand on the sidewalk in front of your house and say whatever they want, the same way you are. Nothing you can do will force anyone to keep their beliefs in their churches, just like nothing they can do will force you to keep yours inside your house.

Then again, we already knew you were an idiot.

lol yeah

 

[Derideo_Te]

I'm amazed at what you presume to know about my history, but being a perfect stranger, it's not surprising that you're wrong. I critically analyze everything. The Bible is no different, and I can say with complete confidence that it is the most accurate piece of antiquity we have. Science proves it, historians prove it, and archeologists love it's accuracy. Nothing has ever been uncovered that proves the Bible wrong.

How Archaeology Disproves Biblical History

New findings point to completely different histories of Israel and Egypt than those in the Bible and thought to be true, including by Finkelstein himself:

• Archaeological evidence contradicts all four stories that make up the foundations of the Bible; and
• the Bible was written, re-written, edited and redacted for the purposes of propaganda.​

Early archaeologists in that part of the world were typically trained as clerics or theologians, the authors note, and so forced artifacts they found to match with Bible stories. That all changed once new excavations, chemical analysis of soil samples and refinements in the carbon-dating technique to determine age, revolutionized the study of these two of the most heavily excavated areas of the planet.

Because many references to places and events in this period show contemporary details were integrated into stories biblical authors maintained happened hundreds or thousands of years before, the modern assessment that the foundations were laid during the late 8th and early 7th centuries BCE appears to be an open-and-shut-case.​

The Exodus

The second foundational tale is that of the Exodus, where God chose Moses to liberate 600,000 men from enslavement in Egypt, and they proceeded to wander around the desert for 40 years.

However, there was no record of any Israelites being in Egypt at that time, and hundreds of thousands of people trekking the desert would likely not have been allowed by Egypt, which tightly controlled the area. There are records of small bands passing through, yet none indicating a mass movement of people. There is also no evidence such a group camped for extended periods – including in the places mentioned in the Bible.

Many of the sites in the story were not inhabited at that time so there was no sign of destruction. Instead, local kings paid tribute to foreign kings in exchange for protection. This is why most villages were unfortified including Jericho, which has been thoroughly excavated and had no walls that could be considered fortifications.

 

[Hollie]

You're now hoping to sidestep your earlier claims as false and unsupportable.

And you're again reduced to lies in the hope of salvaging your bankrupt argument. I made no comment about any tale of resurrection. Typical, but you fundie cranks are as dishonest as a televangelist fleecing you sheep.

My comment was specifically worded to refute your ignorance about biblical tales and fables.

It's just remarkable how dishonest you fundie cranks really are.

Wrong again,. I am challenging you to link to the post in which I lied about something, the same way I linked to your post to prove you lied.

You're not challenging. You're sidestepping your lies and falsehoods you were confronted with.

A couple of pages now with you and the other crank making claims you can't defend. And here you are, promoting your lies and falsehoods.

You still haven't produced a witness to De' hey-Zeus rising from the dead. There are none which even your bibles confirm.

What a shame that you hyper- religious types are so dishonest.

 

[BillyP]

Ok, tell us where Christians are being persecuted.

Seriously? Do you get all your news from the Daily Show?

Christians The world s most persecuted people - Comment - Voices - The Independent

A couple of examples here and there don't make for "Christians are being persecuted". And the "most" persecuted? C'mon seriously? More than Jews? And Muslims?

 

[turzovka]

This is why most villages were unfortified including Jericho, which has been thoroughly excavated and had no walls that could be considered fortifications.

This archeological report (including three separate excavation missions at Jericho) appears to rebut your sources' claims.

Jericho s wall - Has archaeology confirmed the biblical record of its destruction ChristianAnswers.Net

 

[Derideo_Te]

This is why most villages were unfortified including Jericho, which has been thoroughly excavated and had no walls that could be considered fortifications.

This archeological report (including three separate excavation missions at Jericho) appears to rebut your sources' claims.

Jericho s wall - Has archaeology confirmed the biblical record of its destruction ChristianAnswers.Net

Your partisan website is out of date!

References

• "The Walls of Jericho", by Bryant G. Wood, Bible and Spade, Spring 1999, pp. 35-42 (available from the Associates for Biblical Research).
• "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence", by Bryant G. Wood, Biblical Archaeology Review, March/April 1990, pages 44-58.

Ancient Digger Archaeology Walls of Jericho The Archaeology that Demolishes the Bible

Sources

1. Albright, William F. "The Israelite Conquest of Canaan in the Light of Archaeology." The American Schools of Oriental Research. 74. (1939): 11-23.
2. Finkelstein, Israel. The Bible Unearthed. New York: Free Press, 2001.
3. Finkelstein, Israel, and AmiHai Mazar. The Quest for the Historical Israel. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2007.
4. Glueck, Nelson. "Go, View the Land." The American Schools of Oriental Research. No. 122 (1951): 14-18.
5. Kenyon, Kathleen. Digging Up Jericho. London: Praeger Ernest Benn, 1957.
6. Kenyon, Kathleen, Archaeology in the Holy Land. London: Ernest Benn Limited, 1965.
7. Prag, Kay. "The Intermediate Early Bronze-Middle Bronze Age Sequences at Jericho and Tell Iktanu." The American Schools of Oriental Research. No. 264 (1986): 61-72.
8. Ussishkin, David. "Notes on the Fortifications of the Middle Bronze II Period at Jericho and Shechem." The American Schools of Oriental Research. 276. (1989): 29-53.
9. Wright, G. Ernest. Biblical Archaeology. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1962.
10. Wright, G. Ernest. "Is Glueck's Aim to Prove That the Bible Is True?" The American Schools of Oriental Research. 22. No. 4 (1959): 101-108.
11. Wood, Bryant G. Associates for Biblical Research, "Carbon 14 Dating at Jericho." Last modified Aug 07, 2008. Accessed November 1, 2011. Carbon 14 Dating at Jericho
12. Wood, Bryant G. "Did the Israelites Conquer Jericho? A New Look at the Archaeological Evidence." Biblical Archaeology Review. 16. No. 2 (1990): 44-58.
13. Sellin, Ernst, and Carl Watzinger. Jericho: Die Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen . Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs, 1913.

 

[turzovka]

This is why most villages were unfortified including Jericho, which has been thoroughly excavated and had no walls that could be considered fortifications.

This archeological report (including three separate excavation missions at Jericho) appears to rebut your sources' claims.

Jericho s wall - Has archaeology confirmed the biblical record of its destruction ChristianAnswers.Net

Your partisan website is out of date!

I'm not too worried. Nor am I convinced your allegedly "non-partisan" sites have the final say. There is plenty of evidence which still supports a sudden destruction, and the walls were there although you or they say no evidence of real fortification. We shall see. And the time differences are not great, even though they could still be significant in their own ways.

Anyway, I doubt I can add the "Jericho project" to my schedule this week. But... if it is you so eager to have science prove your beliefs, then know that science also does well in supporting ours. The Shroud, for one. You people have a lot of far-fetched ways of dismissing that one.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

 

[sealybobo]

Point two, your lack of knowledge does not make you right.

Sealybobo hates Jesus Christ to such an extreme that it's likely he's actually a demon possessed Satanic cultist, who plays the role of an hate-filled atheist.

This reply reminds me of the person who asks why we reject god. We do not reject god. It'd be like me telling Quantum Windbag to fly to Michigan to meet my God who's a woman, a perfect 10 and will give him mind blowing sex.

If he doesn't come to Michigan, is he rejecting God? No. He's rejecting me and what I say.

So don't say I hate Jesus. Jesus sounded like a great guy. It's you Christians I have a problem with. You, Muslims, Jews, Mormon and every other cult/religion no matter how big or small.

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” – Stephen F Roberts

 

[turzovka]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

 

[sealybobo]

There are no accounts that anyone saw hey-zeus rise from the dead.

Simply parroting the nonsensical claims you were told gives no one confidence that you have a clue.

Actually, there is an account of that event. You might reject it, but that doesn't change the fact that it actually exists.

Lets put 12 Atheists, Jews & Muslims on a Jury and try the evidence of Chrstianity. How do you think you would do?

We would all agree Jesus was just a person, not a Messiah.

The only difference between us Atheists and the Jews/Muslims is that we believe in one less god than all of you. Get it?

So we could put a Muslim on trial and put all Christians, Jews and Atheists on the Jury and the Muslim like the Christian would be found wrong or guilty. Admit it. Get it?

 

[turzovka]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

Believe whatever you want. I could produce scores of scientific documents that explain the carbon dating matters and why it in no way can be trusted, and also goes into very specific details on why it's an absolute impossibility that a medieval person could in any way produce these 3-D qualities, and other features on that cloth, even less how one could even have thought of all these tricks that only modern day science could even be made aware of.

Your denial is a leap of faith that surpasses Christianity's by light years. IMO

 

[sealybobo]

Um, just to clarify, that "old" book was connected with Hebrew scripture, you know, the stuff co-opted by Christianity.

Christianity owes a ton of cash penalties for copyright infringement.

That is just a deflection from my point because you know you can't deal with the truth.

To answer your point...

Christianity is not a "new" religion. Modern day Judaism is a religion created by certain Jews after Christ.

So the original religion (Old Testament) no one follows anymore? It eventually became outdated? When did the Jews stop following the Old Testament and what do they follow now?

I remember seeing a Pubic TV show on Jewish Americans. They decided to put all the Jewish stuff aside and assimilate into America. They started eating non coshure foods and stopped wearing the yamaka's.

So should I be a Jew or Christian? I'm deciding.

 

[sealybobo]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

Believe whatever you want. I could produce scores of scientific documents that explain the carbon dating matters and why it in no way can be trusted, and also goes into very specific details on why it's an absolute impossibility that a medieval person could in any way produce these 3-D qualities, and other features on that cloth, even less how one could even have thought of all these tricks that only modern day science could even be made aware of.

Your denial is a leap of faith that surpasses Christianity's by light years. IMO

Science usually doesn't use one piece of evidence to come up with their conclusions. They usually have 3 or more reasons to believe what they do.

Here is what religion does. They believe in talking snakes because the bible says there were talking snakes. A religious fool doesn't need any other evidence to believe what they believe.

Even if all the other evidence you find contradicts your bible story, you throw away the science and continue to believe your bible. How smart is that?

 

[The Irish Ram]

Hollie, Christ isn't a base ball player, His name is Jesus, not De hayZeus. And here are the names of 3 eyewitnesses who testified to seeing Christ return:
Rabbi Addas
Rabbi Finees
Rabbi Egias

 

[sealybobo]

Hollie, Christ isn't a base ball player, His name is Jesus, not De hayZeus. And here are the names of 3 eyewitnesses who testified to seeing Christ return:
Rabbi Addas
Rabbi Finees
Rabbi Egias

Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts - Scientific American

 

[turzovka]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

Believe whatever you want. I could produce scores of scientific documents that explain the carbon dating matters and why it in no way can be trusted, and also goes into very specific details on why it's an absolute impossibility that a medieval person could in any way produce these 3-D qualities, and other features on that cloth, even less how one could even have thought of all these tricks that only modern day science could even be made aware of.

Your denial is a leap of faith that surpasses Christianity's by light years. IMO

Science usually doesn't use one piece of evidence to come up with their conclusions. They usually have 3 or more reasons to believe what they do.

Here is what religion does. They believe in talking snakes because the bible says there were talking snakes. A religious fool doesn't need any other evidence to believe what they believe.

Even if all the other evidence you find contradicts your bible story, you throw away the science and continue to believe your bible. How smart is that?

I would disagree and tell you that is what too many scientists do instead. They uncover an incongruity of sorts (e.g. the carbon dating of that patch on the shroud) and boldly proclaim "It's a fake!" and run away from all the many other troubling matters or inexplicable qualities on the shroud. The carbon dating has been refuted by numerous scientific studies since ---- care to read all that?

As far as Christians rejecting all these problems in the Bible and standing by their faith, do not care. That is not how I operate, that is surely not how the Catholic Church operates. And neither does Catholicism's theology stand on someone's interpretation of the Bible, nor does it stand on the Bible alone, by any means!

So you can use that straw man argument somewhere else and influence certain minds.

 

[sealybobo]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

Believe whatever you want. I could produce scores of scientific documents that explain the carbon dating matters and why it in no way can be trusted, and also goes into very specific details on why it's an absolute impossibility that a medieval person could in any way produce these 3-D qualities, and other features on that cloth, even less how one could even have thought of all these tricks that only modern day science could even be made aware of.

Your denial is a leap of faith that surpasses Christianity's by light years. IMO

Science usually doesn't use one piece of evidence to come up with their conclusions. They usually have 3 or more reasons to believe what they do.

Here is what religion does. They believe in talking snakes because the bible says there were talking snakes. A religious fool doesn't need any other evidence to believe what they believe.

Even if all the other evidence you find contradicts your bible story, you throw away the science and continue to believe your bible. How smart is that?

I would disagree and tell you that is what too many scientists do instead. They uncover an incongruity of sorts (e.g. the carbon dating of that patch on the shroud) and boldly proclaim "It's a fake!" and run away from all the many other troubling matters or inexplicable qualities on the shroud. The carbon dating has been refuted by numerous scientific studies since ---- care to read all that?

As far as Christians rejecting all these problems in the Bible and standing by their faith, do not care. That is not how I operate, that is surely not how the Catholic Church operates. And neither does Catholicism's theology stand on someone's interpretation of the Bible, nor does it stand on the Bible alone, by any means!

So you can use that straw man argument somewhere else and influence certain minds.

Every conceivable argument, every imaginable piece of evidence for god is not without some fatal flaw or more likely explanation which precludes it from being used as definitive proof.

Why there is no god

The standard of evidence required to prove a god’s existence is immediately more than any personal anecdote, witness testimony, ancient book or reported miracle – none of which can be considered extraordinarily reliable. The human mind is also highly susceptible to being fooled and even fooling itself.

There is, however, a simple answer to the question what would it take to convince an atheist. God is what it would take to convince an atheist.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test too.

Shroud of Turin failed the carbon dating test

Official announcement[edit]
In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.e. that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 CE, with 95% confidence. The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.[35] The uncalibrated dates from the individual laboratories, with 1-sigma errors (68% confidence), were as follows:

• Tucson: 646 ± 31 years;
• Oxford: 750 ± 30 years;
• Zürich: 676 ± 24 years old;
• the weighted mean was 689 ± 16 years, which corresponds to calibrated ages of CE 1273-1288 with 68% confidence, and CE 1262-1384 with 95% confidence.

As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable."[35]

And if I were you I would not dig any deeper about the carbon dating, because it will only go a long way in destroying your myth about atheism. The evidence is out there, and clear.

(Never mind the fact science can in no way explain the incredible qualities on that cloth that no one can duplicate now, much less have done so in medieval times. Science has proven the divinity of this image.)

Scientists have already demonstrated how it was made using what was readily available in the middle ages.

Shroud of Turin replicated by Italian scientist using ancient techniques may prove the relic a fake - NY Daily News

Note that was a period when "Holy Relics" were prized and high prices were paid for them. Plenty of motive to come up with that "shroud" and make a quick profit off gullible believers like yourself.

Believe whatever you want. I could produce scores of scientific documents that explain the carbon dating matters and why it in no way can be trusted, and also goes into very specific details on why it's an absolute impossibility that a medieval person could in any way produce these 3-D qualities, and other features on that cloth, even less how one could even have thought of all these tricks that only modern day science could even be made aware of.

Your denial is a leap of faith that surpasses Christianity's by light years. IMO

I always find it so ironic that you accuse others of a "leap of faith" when you are the one who is denying the reproducible scientific facts in order to take your own blind "leap of faith" based upon nothing whatsoever but your own demonstrably fallible personal beliefs.