McCrone

=Page in construction=

__**
 * __//"The tape of a Shroud blood-image (area 3-CB) .....at high magnification." (Mc Crone, Judgement Day For The Turin Shroud, p. 91, Figure 22)//

__**W. McCrone's hypothesis**__ [|W. McCrone] had the occasion to analyze the STURP sticky tapes samples collected by R. Rogers and detected iron oxide and other elements connected with artists' pigments in them so he simply hypothesized that the TS body image is a painting.

//- Title of the hypothesis: **The Shroud is a painting**// //- Author's name(s) who first proposed the hypothesis coupled with the researcher's name who presents it// //- Detailed technique description for the **formation of the body image**// from http://mcri.org/shroudupdate.html#anchor577043 "Shortly after I learned through careful study of the 32 sticky-tapes taken from the Shroud that the image substance was paint, I made up two paints; one with pigment (red ochre) and gelatin solution and the other with diluted blood. The red ochre paint was 0.01% pigment and 0.01% gelatin in water. The blood paint was 3% whole blood in water. I made up these two paints for two reasons: first, to determine the amount of iron (as red ochre) that is needed to register a visible image (it turned out to be about 3 micrograms per square centimeter); second, to compare sticky tape samples from linen cloths painted with both paints. The red ochre-painted linen yielded tapes indistinguishable from the Shroud tapes." It is strange that such a great microscopist was not able to distinguish the very great differences between Shroud image fibers and painted with iron oxide ones (see the photos here). No particular reference was made to the brush and to the painting technique. //- Detailed technique description for the **formation of the blood stains**//. No particular reference was made to the technique used for the blood-like stains also forgotting that under the bloodstain no body image exist (so the bloodstains came to the cloth before the body image impression). //- Possible correlation or interferences with the formation of other stains such as water// Water could have blurred the body image if it was painted, but no blurs can be found in correspondence of the waterstains. //- Explanation of some details and possible comments// Before to take it in serious consideration, this hypothesis must therefore be completed by an expert who sustains it. Up to now the blood on some Shroud fiber, even if it has been demostrated to be blood, is not well explained. Someone hypothezizes that the red "sub-micron particles" (as McCrone called them) could be exsicated erythrocytes but the lacknes of material for new experiments give and explanation less easy. //- List of facts in favour of the hypothesis// W. McCrone detected the presence of minerals in the sticky tapes picked up by R. Rogers of STURP. //- Main bibliographic references//
 * W. McCrone
 * G. Fanti presents this hypothesis
 * 1) MCCRONE W. C. and SKIRIUS C., "Light Microscopical Study of the Turin 'Shroud,' I," Microscope 28, 105 (1980).
 * 2) MCCRONE W. C.: “Light microscopical study of the Turin ‘Shroud’ II”, //The Microscope// 28, No. 4, 1980, pp. 115-120;
 * 3) MCCRONE W. C.: “Light microscopical study of the Turin ‘Shroud’ III”, //The Microscope// 29, No. 1, 1981, pp. 19-39.
 * 4) MCCRONE W. C.: “Shroud image is the work of an artist”, //The Skeptical Inquirer// 6, No. 3, 1982, pp. 35-36;
 * 5) MCCRONE W. C.: “The Shroud of Turin: blood or artist's pigment?”, //Accounts of Chemical Research//, American Chemical Society, 23, 1990, pp. 77-83;
 * 6) MCCRONE W. C.: “Shroud 1999”, //The Microscope// 47, No. 1, 1999, pp. 55-61;
 * 7) MCCRONE W. C.: “The Shroud Image”, //The Microscope// 48, No. 2, 2000, pp. 79-85.


 * COMMENTS**

.... To be continued


 * FACTS IN DISAGREEMENT WITH THE SHROUD
 * In reference to the [|List of Facts] the following facts are not in agreement with the technique proposed by W. McCrone