User talk:Thucyd

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Thucyd, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking Button sig.png or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.


Happy editing! Dawnseeker2000 23:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Getting started
Finding your way around
Editing articles
Getting help
How you can help


Hi & welcome to Wikipedia. Good contributions to the Shroud page - well referenced. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 13:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Thucyd (talk) 00:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


Hi, I built a page for STURP but you seem to know that topic better than I do. Could you just check that I made no big errors there? I will appreciate it. What I am not sure about is the size of the sample they used. How large or small was it? The exact size of that does not seem to have been discussed that much. Another issue that is unclear is that of "who has had access to the shroud?" anyway. SLURP, Mechthild Flury-Lemberg and Barbara Frale seem to have had access. All others seem to be discussing it with no access. Am I right? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 14:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

VP8 Image Analyzer[edit]

Hi, FYI, there is an article now, and it needs help. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 04:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Shroud of Turin[edit]

The article Shroud of Turin you nominated as a good article has failed Symbol unsupport vote.svg; see Talk:Shroud of Turin for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for having taken the time to review carefully this article. There is a lot of work in front of us ! Thucyd (talk) 11:34, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:People associated with the Shroud of Turin[edit]

Info talk.png

Category:People associated with the Shroud of Turin, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Student7 (talk) 03:23, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas[edit]

Merry Christmas (Col 1:16) History2007 (talk) 16:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Radiocarbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin[edit]


user:History2007 suggested I leave you a message regarding potentially removing the "2% carbon" claim on the above page. My suggestion is on the talk page, but it seems like you know better than I would. What do you think? Cheers JTansut (talk) 14:18, 11 January 2011 (UTC)


Hi, some one added some good new info to Barbara Frale's page. I think the death certificate item will in time become important, for it is a direct statement - not conjecture like so many other things. Is there any new info on that? That material has now become centralized on Frale's page, so if you could please check how accurate that page is, it will be appreciated. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 06:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Frale comments[edit]

What is your take on this? History2007 (talk) 10:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Christmas & question[edit]

Merry Christmas

A question I was going to ask you. Are you aware of any proposed effect of blood stream and sweat reagents as a means of image imprinting on the Shroud?

It is not my idea, but it was proposed by a mystic, as discussed in the book she wrote. Volume 5 of her book, section 609 (page 669 of the English version) says that it was the result of kidney failure when the kidneys were crushed by the beatings, elevating the urea levels.

In effect she states that short term uremia was caused by kidney failure due to beatings, changing the body fluid contents to the point that the sweat had additional reagents, affecting the linen, and imprinting an image on it.

Given that you know the field so well, even if you do not have an immediate reference, perhaps you can ask around. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 21:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

PS: After I typed that it occurred to me to do a Google search and the terms urea and Maillard do come up together in PubMed sources. I am not a biochemist, but it would be interesting to know what a biochemist would say to elevated urea as a Maillard reagent. History2007 (talk) 21:43, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
First, thank you so much for the Christmas Tree! I needed one!
Yes... Hmm, I have already heard of Maria Valtorta's writings on the Turin shroud. But, to my knowledge, there was never something written in a peer-reviewed journal on a possible kidney failure and its consequences on the image.
I think that another mystic is taken more seriously by some (a tiny minority) of shroudies. It's Anne-Catherine Emmerich. In his book

Sindone 101 domande e riposte (The Shroud, 101 questions and answers), prof. Baima Bollone wrote... Oh wait a minute (dramatic effect...). I have only the French translation of Baima Bollone's book and Baima Bollone does not give the exact references for the quote (but I guess it's easy to find) but Emmerich also suggests that there was a problem with uremia. Maybe it was Valtorta's source, or maybe not.

By the way, if you don't know it, there's a forthcoming article written by Giulio Fanti, to be published in the Journal of Imaging Science and Technology ( the issue of nov-dec.) : G. FANTI, "Hypotheses regarding the formation of the body image on the Turin Shroud.

A critical compendium". Another very interesting article in November on aromas and burial ointments was published in Radiation Effects and Defects in Solids : abstract. Thanks. Thucyd (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that is right. Yet as Emmerich's page says she never wrote anything herself and Brentano is said to have fabricated most of the material attributed to her, given that after his death in his study material to support that claim were found. As you said, it is true that Valtorta had read some of Emmerich. But Valtorta's reaction to Emmerich was "pure outrage" because she felt that Emmerich had made so many errors and she had apparently read Emmerich after completing her own handwritten notebooks. So Emmerich was most probably not a source for Valtorta.
However, I thought the urea mention by Valtorta would be interesing to check on, given that she had also written things about the night sky that were later studied by VanZandt at Purdue using computer simulations and they were surprisingly consistent, and impossible to know without a computer, according to VanZandt. So given that she was also no chemist and probably did not know what a "reagent" is (but she wrote the term in her notebook), I wondered if there may be something interesting there.
What I was hoping was that the next time you may go to a Shroud conference, over lunch, if you are sitting next to a chemist you may ask: "is urea a possible reagent for Maillard reactions"? And the chemist may either already know the answer, or may look further into it anyway. That way in 2-3 years the situation may clarify.
I will look at the paper links you posted over the holidays. Should give me a break from the holidays! Cheers. History2007 (talk) 15:27, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


Merry Christmas!
History2007 (talk) 20:37, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry, but I can not be involved in that, or any other page. As can be seen from my user page, I will be moving on to other activities as of next week, and will not have a user acount. It does not really matter what the shroud Wiki-lede says now. There is an app that does that better, Fanti will soon publish and the game will change. Those who argue against the Shroud are playing a losing game - I know that. The trend is there and the relevant forces are in place outside Wikipedia to establish its authenticity. It is just a question of a short time now. I will leave a message for Student7 to look at it anyway. And I do wish you the best. You know more about this topic than anyone else I have seen, anywhere. But have no fear, it is on its way to be established, without help from a Wikipage. Game is over. Best... History2007 (talk) 11:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:10, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Shroud of Turin[edit]

Hi Thucyd. I noticed you've invested some time in the Shroud of Turin article so I was wondering if you could take a quick look at my suggestions to improve the neutrality of some specific wording, outlined at its Talk page and contribute your thoughts? I know with the lead-up to Christmas editors have had other priorities, so if wikipedians do see any merit in my suggestion I'd like the community input. If not, I'll move right along. Much appreciated! (talk) 04:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)