Version du 19 février 2024 à 15:32 (voir la source) U-sc (discussion | contributions) ← Modification précédente		Version du 1 mars 2024 à 16:22 (voir la source) U-sc (discussion | contributions) Modification suivante →
Ligne 1 :		Ligne 1 :
−	=Hypothèse d'une implication E.T. au Moyen-Âge=	+	The Ummans maintain that the real Sindon is kept secret in the Vatican because its scientific analysis from 1902 onwards would have shown the fabric to be impregnated with fresh, unclotted blood, indicating that Jesus did not die on the Cross.
		+
		+	''The real Sindon would have been replaced by an artifact manufactured in 1927 and substituted for the authentic one from 1931.''
		+
		+	It is this apocryphal copy that is now on public display in Turin. The photographs and analyses carried out since 1969 (Pellegrino), 1978 (STURP) and 1988 (carbon 14) would have been made on this apocryphal copy, leading to a number of confusions''''
		+
		+	<center> [[image:suaire de turin.jpg| Holy Shroud photographed by Secundo Pia in 1898|200px| ]]</center>
		+
		+	= what is the Holy Shroud or Shroud of Turin? =
		+
		+	<center>[[File:imageglobalsaintsuaire.jpg|400px|thumb|right|Photography Secundo Pia, 1898]]</center>
		+
		+	The Turin Shroud, or Linceul de Turin, is a yellowed linen sheet 4.42 meters long by 1.13 meters wide showing the blurred image (front and back) of a man showing the traces of wounds consistent with crucifixion.  It has been preserved since 1578 in the Guarini chapel of Turin's Cathedral of St. John the Baptist.
		+
		+	Since the representation depicts certain details of the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth described in the canonical Gospels, it is the object of popular piety and is considered by the Catholic Church to be an icon. Some believers venerate it as an insignificant relic, the "Holy Shroud".
		+
		+	In 1898, Secondo Pia, an Italian lawyer and photographer, had the opportunity to photograph the Turin Shroud while it was on display in Turin Cathedral. When he developed the photographs, he was surprised to discover that the negative image of the shroud revealed far more detail than was visible to the naked eye. This discovery aroused great interest and paved the way for a series of in-depth scientific studies and research into the shroud.
		+
		+	The negative image obtained by Pia showed very precise anatomical details and facial and body features that seemed to match the accounts of the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth as described in the Gospels. This revelation rekindled interest in the shroud and sparked intense debate about its authenticity and origin.
		+
		+	The relic escaped the flames of a fire in 1532, when a blaze ravaged the chapel where it was kept in Chambéry, France, and in 1997 when a fire broke out in the Guarini chapel of the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin.
		+
		+	''See also: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suaire_de_Turin ''
		+
		+	= Authentication of the Holy Shroud by the Ummans =
		+
		+	The Ummans authenticated this relic as early as 1987:
		+
		+	{{Letter|H7|March 22, 1987, Jorge Barrenechea, from 14h45 to 15h15,
		+
		+	J.B. THE HOLY SHROUD OF TURIN?
		+
		+	U: It's authentic. It's that of Jesus of Nazareth. It's his shroud. There are no miracles. It has been preserved by believers and it keeps very well}}.
		+
		+	Beyond this authentication of the Holy Shroud, the Ummans also warn that this relic has been the object of fraud to confuse mankind in its history. The Ummans invite us to verify that Church figures were involved in the substitution of the authentic Holy Shroud by an apocryphal copy.
		+
		+	== Telephone calls about the Holy Shroud
		+
		+	From March 1987 to November 1988, the Ummans began an intense sequence of dozens of letters and 24 telephone calls to two Spanish recipients, Mr. Luis Jiménez Marhuenda and Mr. Jorge Barrenechea.
		+
		+	The subjects of the telephone conversations between the Ummans and the Spanish callers are numerous, but they frequently concern Jesus Christ and the denunciation of the Holy Shroud fraud.
		+
		+	On January 28, 1988, from 1.35pm to 1.50pm, the Ummans announced the dispatch of two important letters:
		+
		+	{{Letter|H18|
		+
		+	Ummo - You will receive a letter. You can read it in the NECESSARY presence of :Jorge Barrenechea, Alfredo Lara, José-María Pilón, Juan Domínguez, Dionisio Garrido who must necessarily be present.
		+
		+	Other brothers may also be present, but the meeting cannot be opened WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF THE BROTHERS MENTIONED. If one of the FIVE is missing, the envelope cannot be opened.
		+
		+	You will receive the letter by poste restante. You can pick it up the previous Saturday. You cannot read it before February 7. It is very important because it reveals future plans for OYAGAA. This report is very important }}
		+
		+	See also [[Compilation of extracts from telephone calls about the Holy Shroud]]
		+
		+	== Letters about the Holy Shroud of Turin ==
		+
		+	Finally, Mr. Jorge Barrenechea will finally be the recipient of 6 important letters, namely:
		+
		+	<small> 1998, January, 10, 13 and 20: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D792-1.htm D 792-1] Les "Oemiiwoa "incarnations cosmiques impulsant l'évolution ( généralités)
		+
		+	1998, January, 20: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D792-2.htm D 792-2] Life and death of Christ
		+
		+	1988, November, 11: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D505.htm D505]: How the Turin Sindon fraud was perpetrated.
		+
		+	1988, November, 11: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D518.htm D518]: Gravity of the Turin Shroud fraud / Socio-political stakes of disclosure.
		+
		+	1988, November, 13: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D490.htm D490]: Organization of a denunciation meeting concerning the Sindon [ Hotel Sanvy, Madrid ].
		+
		+	1988, November, 13: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D499.htm D499] : Scientific concept of Ommiwoa on planet Ummo - Explanation on scientific analyses of Sindon in 1988 </small>
		+
		+
		+	Spanish recipients [[Antonio Ribera]], [[Ignacio Darnaude]], Juan Trigo Gandul will receive:
		+
		+	<small> 1988, November, 1: [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/D488.htm D 488] The fraud on the Turin Shroud (to Darnaude) / Explanation on the Oemmiwoa </small>
		+
		+	See also [[Oemmiwoa letters from 1987 to 1988 - Holy Shroud ]]
		+
		+	== Fraud denunciation conference, Madrid, Hotel Sanvy, 1988 ==
		+
		+	{{Letter|D488| A fraud has been committed, which we wish to denounce to you, although we have no legal identity.
		+
		+	An affair which is more regrettable if we consider that certain members of the Roman apostolic hierarchy and the totality of believers of this denomination are innocent of it. }}
		+
		+	But most surprising of all was the Ummans' initiative in organizing a [[conference to denounce the Holy Shroud fraud| discreet conference in Madrid]], at the Hotel Sanvy on Sunday November 20, 1988.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D490| "We are staying under cover while we formulate our denunciation in front of simple OEMMIIs. We know perfectly well that this is not the right way to go about it, and no doubt you will be astonished at the ingenuity of our procedure.
		+
		+	In view of the seriousness of the facts, you'd be looking for other methods, using other, more effective institutions. Just think, we could meditate on a more suitable time and method, or ask you for more dynamic and effective assistance. We ask you to respect our strategy. We are all too aware of the time urgency with which the meeting has been convened. }}
		+
		+	= The historical background to the controversy and the Umma statements ==
		+
		+	== Jesus Christ would not have died when he came down from the cross ==
		+
		+	According to the Umma, Jesus of Nazareth was wrapped in a long cloth when he came down from the cross, but he was not dead. On the contrary, they recently clarified that he was under the influence of a powerful drug to simulate his demise. <ref>( cf. [https://www.ummo-sciences.org/fr/W5.htm 312-Stat-2]; October 2021 ) </ref>
		+
		+	Receiving treatments including ointments made from [https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aloe_vera aloe vera], Jesus is said to have awakened from his deep sleep while wrapped in this cloth or '''shroud'''. He would then have resumed his preaching shortly before experiencing a strange phenomenon described in the 1988 letters, namely [[ASNEEIIBIAEDOO]]
		+
		+	<center> [[File:Aloe vera vulgaris.jpeg|aloe_vera_vulgaris | 150 px|]] </center>
		+
		+	{{Letter|D792-2| The myth of death, has its origin in a false interpretation of Jesus' martyrdom. It is totally certain that this [[OEMMIIWOA]] is subjected to the torment of crucifixion, although the post-testament chronicles are significantly distorted to the point of being converted into legend, but Jesus does not die. His disciples manage to recover his almost lifeless body, although they spread the word of his death to avoid further persecution. They heal his wounds and, once recovered, the religious leader resumes his doctrinaire activity.
		+
		+	Shortly afterwards, the [[ASNEEIIBIAEDOO]] (disappearance) would take place before his stunned followers. The account of this event was later distorted and interpreted as "Ascension to Heaven". The phenomenon didn't seem all that surprising to fanatical humans convinced of their Master's Divinity. We have proved that the shroud preserved in Turin once surrounded the body of Jesus. We recommend a more in-depth study of this historical relic. The vaporigraphic thesis, consisting in the impregnation of the cloth by phyto-therapeutic substances with which those who cared for him impregnated Jesus' body to soothe his wounds, explains the imprint of the image. The thesis that some of your brothers have put forward concerning a hypothetical mysterious radiation is totally absurd and anti-scientific. The tunic was kept by a peasant called ISMAHI, who witnessed the "miraculous" disappearance of the Galilean Master}}.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| The cloth wrapped around Jesus' body was impregnated with products, including aloe vera to soothe his wounds, which are irrefutable proof of the posterior imprint. The cloth was kept secretly by one of his disciples, an agricultural worker named Semah or Semahel, who witnessed with others the event of the [[ASNEEIIBIAEDOO]] (an instant characterized by a level of consciousness provoked by a dysthymic or emotional frame that damages the limbic system and causes the disappearance of an ommiwoa's body into another universe). It's understandable that such a marvellous event should arouse the fervour of a people inclined to the marvellous and to give a magical meaning to what they don't understand.
		+
		+	The Sindon was initially kept by Esteban, and after his assassination, passed into hands unknown even to us, only to reappear in those of Proclus in the 3rd century, until the Persians captured the city of Edesa. In the end, the Templars rescued it, its secret was revealed with great discretion to King BAUDOIN II and it remained hidden until it was recovered by you in the form already disclosed}}.
		+
		+	Faced with the historical facts of the controversy surrounding the authenticity of the Turin shroud, Umma's statements provide an alternative perspective. The relevance of their sindonological theses stems from an in-depth knowledge of the history of the Holy Shroud, particularly in modern times.
		+
		+	The ''shroud'' of this period (original for the sequel) would therefore bear the scientific proof that the official account of Christ's death would be erroneous, as Christ would not have died on the cross. Letters from 1988 such as D 792-2 also provide the conclusions of the investigations carried out by the Umma expeditionaries.
		+
		+	Indeed, the presence of non-coagulated blood would call into question whether Jesus died on the Cross. And French scientists would have understood this as early as 1902
		+
		+	== 1902: P. Vignon and R. Colson explained that Jesus did not die on the Cross ==
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505|§ 22 - It was Dr. Vignon who warned the few responsible when the grandiose discovery was made! The blood on the "corpse" was "fresh"! On several occasions, similar expert analyses were carried out, with Yves Delage and other biologists taking it in turns to confirm his thesis. How is it possible that this was not taken into account? Pierre] Barbet was equally astonished. Clotted blood leaves no lasting traces, and the specialists know this}}.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| The scandal caused by the discovery of the blood flow evidenced by the holy sheet is incomprehensible. At the time, it was taken for granted that this evidence belied death by crucifixion. Yet you yourselves have verified that, in certain circumstances (wound of the great vessels, albeit after death), the flow was possible. In any case, it was difficult to explain the flow of the other wounds by hypostasis <ref>In the medical field the term hypostasis designates an accumulation of blood in the lower part of the lungs, accumulation produced in general as a result of cardiac insufficiency </ref> (The wounded man was laid on a bed inclined about 28 degrees). The current state of the false Sindon not being explicable by fibrinolysis either<ref> Fibrinolysis is a complex physiological process of dissolution of blood clots (consisting of fibrin) by plasmin1. This process terminates blood coagulation to repermeabilize repaired blood vessels and serves to prevent thrombosis formation. The lysis of the fibrin mesh by plasmin results from the activation of plasminogen</ref>, so it's easy to see why we had to resort to an artifice to circumvent a fact that was incomprehensible}}.
		+
		+
		+	== 1902: P. Vignon and R. Colson would also have explained the origin of the imprint ==
		+
		+	However, from 1902 onwards, examination of the bloodstains on this ''shroud'' indicates that the person who bled (''Jesus'') had not died when it was wrapped, nor in the days that followed. The Ummans pay particular tribute to the seminal work of scientists such as [[Paul Vignon ]] and [[René Colson]] ''
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| It was precisely your biologist brother Paul Vignon who discovered the mysterious effect on tissue. Ammonia vapors react with aloe (don't forget that OEMMIWOA ETAIT BADIGEONNE D'ALOES COMME ONGUENT CURATIF), generating a production of yellow color and a certain degree of viscosity that stained the tissue. ( ... ) It is necessary to insist: the hypothesis of Dr. Vignon (Docteur en Sciences Naturelles) is correct (Vaporography) together with that of Dr. René Colson (Physician, member of the Académie des Sciences de Paris)}}.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D792-2| We have proved that the shroud preserved in Turin surrounded the body of Jesus. We recommend a more in-depth study of this historical relic. The vaporigraphic thesis, consisting in the impregnation of the cloth by phyto-therapeutic substances with which those who cared for him impregnated Jesus' body to soothe his wounds, explains the imprint of the image. The thesis that some of your brothers have put forward concerning a hypothetical mysterious radiation is totally absurd and anti-scientific }}
		+
		+	{| class="wikitable"
		+	|+
		+	|-
		+	| <center>[[File:vapographie.jpg|250 px|]]</center>
		+	| <small>Légende : Paul Vignon, 1938, '''Le Saint-Suaire de Turin, devant la science, l'archéologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique''', 2nd edition: Photograph of experiments: "impression by ammoniacal vapors of a plaster rosette, made on a cloth rubbed with aloe powder. The plaster had been immersed for some time in an extended ammonia solution, then partly dried, but not sufficiently: the watercolor stains are due to the fact that too much water remained. The exposure didn't need to exceed half an hour. Below: photographic negative of the print."</small>
		+	|}
		+
		+	= a challenge to the fundamental dogmas of the Church =
		+
		+	Both Jesus' death on the Cross and the Resurrection episode are founding pillars for the Church's dogmas. The official version of the life of Jesus and therefore the fundamental interpretation of Christianity by the Vatican, but also by other churches, such as the Protestant and Orthodox Churches.
		+
		+	It was the earthquake produced by this questioning by Science as early as 1902 that triggered a series of events.
		+
		+	== Observation of the Holy Shroud reveals the presence of fresh blood ==
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| It was Dr. Vignon who warned those in charge when the grandiose discovery was made! The blood on the "corpse" was "fresh"! Yves Delage and other biologists took it in turns to confirm his thesis. How could it not be taken into account? Pierre] Barbet was equally astonished. Coagulated blood leaves no lasting traces, and specialists know this.
		+
		+	The presence of blood DISMISSES AT A GLANCE THE PREMISES THAT FOUND CATHOLICISM }}
		+
		+	{{Letter|D488| § 3 - After copying Secundo Pia's report in 1898, academician Yves Delage discovered that SINDON's bloodstains revealed the sad truth. The prints were still bleeding after the body had been carefully washed. The shroud was never wrapped in strips (PHAKIAI) as prescribed}}.
		+
		+	== The absence of linen strips (phakiai) in contradiction with Jewish funeral rites ==
		+
		+	The absence of linen strips on the Turin shroud can be seen as a departure from traditional Jewish funeral practices of Jesus' time, which has contributed to the debate about the shroud's authenticity and origin. The Ummans' explanation would shed new light on these debates.
		+
		+	Linen strips, or "phakiai", were indeed used in Jewish funeral practices of the time, and this is documented in various historical sources (Flavius Josephus and Philo of Alexandria) and religious texts, (Talmud and Midrash ) and finally concordant archaeological observations.  Linen strips were often used to wrap the body of the deceased as part of Jewish burial rituals. After the body had been prepared, it was wrapped in linen strips to preserve and protect it during burial. This practice was seen as a sign of respect for the deceased and was an integral part of Jewish funeral rites at the time.
		+
		+	What's more, this difference contradicts the Gospel according to John (John 19:40): "''So they took the body of Jesus, and bound it with bindings and spices, as was the custom for burial among the Jews.''"
		+
		+	= Roman Catholic cardinals at the center of the fraud =
		+
		+	The Ummans invite us to verify that Church figures were panic-stricken from 1902 onwards, and that a group of cardinals initiated a plot to solve the problem in the first place:
		+
		+	== 1902 and 1911: unsuccessful first attempt at fraud ==
		+
		+	Initially, between 1902 and 1911, the cardinals attempted to erase the traces of blood by damaging the authentic relic.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| A few cardinals were aware of this. Fewer than fourteen were aware of the affair. At the time, it was not known that the painting could be dated with such precision, and the only thing that could be done was to remove the liquid blood stains. In addition, it was claimed that the marks left by a missing bandage could be added by falsifying the print, and we can already see that the result was quite different.
		+
		+	A 17th-century canvas was used, and the imprint was falsified by means of a wood carving carefully treated with aromatic substances. Next, a 14cm strip of canvas was used to add bands and bandages.
		+
		+	The final canvas is photographed on plates similar to those obtained by Pia. The result was profoundly coarser than the authentic print. The superimposed images barely coincide, and color nuances are not possible without the addition of products that an expert would be able to unmask. Unfortunately, the appearance of the bandage marks reveals the deception in full. }}
		+
		+	==1911 to 1928: production of the definitive apocrypha ==
		+
		+	Following this highly problematic failure, the Cardinals are said to have embarked on a more methodical scientific study to analyze the technical challenges to be resolved.
		+
		+	After several attempts between 1911 and 1927, the forgers succeeded in producing an apocryphal copy of the authentic Shroud around 1927.
		+
		+	=== Multiple techniques used ===
		+
		+	The Ummans detail precisely the multiplicity of different techniques they would have analyzed on the apocryphal copy between 1927 and 1928, including:
		+
		+	<center>
		+	{| class="wikitable"
		+	|+
		+	|-
		+	! Description ( in D 505 )
		+	|-
		+	| Selection of fabrics dating from 1220 from the Jaffa region (Palestine).
		+	|-
		+	| Use of an original scale copy of Secondo Pia's plates.
		+	|-
		+	| Treatment of the canvas with a metal bas-relief heated to varying temperatures (average 248°C, maximum 410°C).
		+	|-
		+	| Heating of the print for several months using an electric resistance plate.
		+	|-
		+	| Introduction of 2 coin designs that would not appear on the original authentic sindon.
		+	|-
		+	| Final touch-up with a gentle rubbing of the cloth.
		+	|-
		+	| Wash one part of the sheet with diluted sweat.
		+	|-
		+	| Wash other areas with solutions of varying concentrations of sulfuric acid in water.
		+	|}
		+	</center>
		+
		+	This leads them to explain:
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| This multiplicity of techniques has disoriented today's specialists, with technicians striving to establish a single mode of explanation for the process of obtaining the imprint. We congratulate the few and little-known men who guessed: Dr. Casselli, Geofferey Ashe, Rev. Busnelli, Dr. Rogers and above all Dr. Vittorio Delfino Pesce, who first reported in 1987 that the holy sheet had been counterfeited using a metal bas-relief heated to 230°}}.
		+
		+	=== Observable differences in fabric structure ===
		+
		+	The Ummans also provide precise parameters for distinguishing between the original Shroud and its apocryphal copy.
		+
		+	For the apocryphal copy, the forgers used fabric dating from 1220 from the Jaffa region (Palestine).
		+
		+
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| [the fabric used is] in the form of type 4 twill with a structure named by you as "Fishbone" of very irregular gauge of 10.2 for the weft and 3.3 for the warp (the gauge is given in British Na) <ref>the English units perhaps refer to the publication of the results announced in 1988 in the Anglo-Saxon journal Nature on February 16, 1989. </ref>.
		+
		+	The values are significantly different from those that make up the authentic (now concealed) Sindon, whose values are: 8.3 weft and 4.2 warp "" }}
		+
		+	Furthermore, the fabric of the authentic Shroud could be dated to around the 1st century A.D., notably by Carbon-14 dating.
		+
		+	Photos taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931 actually show a "fishbone" fabric structure:
		+
		+	{| class="wikitable"
		+	|+
		+	|-
		+	| <center>[[File:enriedetailarrêtedepoisson.jpg|300 px|]]</center>
		+	| <small>Caption: page VI; Paul Vignon, 1938, '''Le Saint-Suaire de Turin, devant la science, l'archéologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique''', 2nd edition:
		+
		+	Would this enlargement of Giuseppe Enrie's 1931 photos confirm that this is a type 4 twill weave with a structure named by you as "Fishbone" of very irregular gauge of 10.2 for the weft and 3.3 for the warp (the gauge is given in Na of Great Britain)? </small>
		+	|<center>[[File:structurearrêtedepoisson.jpg|300 px|]]</center>
		+
		+	The fishbone structure is a form of weaving made by arranging weft wefts by changing direction with each successive stratum, so as to give a "fishbone" appearance with an angle of around 45° between wefts
		+	|}
		+
		+	== replacement of the original by the apocryphal copy circa 1929 ==
		+
		+	The cardinals involved would then have replaced the original with a copy around 1929. Ummans are somewhat hesitant about this date:
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| Finally, in early 1929, the exchange of the Sindon took place secretly behind the back of the House of Savoy, which owned the relic. The original was kept in the cardinal's residence in Turin, while the fake was locked away on the Bertola altar ( .... ).
		+
		+	The question that needs clarification is the exact date of the imposture. We have it without too much certainty. Sometime in April 1929, it was decided to change the Sindon. It was the decision of Cardinal Gasparri, accompanied by another curial companion, to change the shroud. December 1928 is considered to be the date of the regrettable event (we were unable to determine the day). For this reason, we consider 1928 to be the date on which the crime was committed}}.
		+
		+	The apocryphal copy was close enough to the authentic Shroud for the Cardinals, given the scientific knowledge and analysis techniques available at the time. But the evolution of knowledge and techniques was to prove unexpected and problematic for their plot.
		+
		+	According to the Ummans, the fabric displayed in public ostentations since 1931 is the apocryphal one.
		+
		+	{{Letter|D505| In 1931, Giuseppe Enrie's test was anxiously awaited, but no difference was detected. The deception has succeeded.
		+	Those in charge could not suspect that the Sindon analysis would be so clear-cut. [Pierre Barbet could not have imagined that it would be so successful. Presumably, the fingerprint will be considered a by-product of vaporization and the bloodstain a mark of blood coagulation}}.
		+
		+	What's more, the many photographs taken by professional photographer Giuseppe Enrie in May 1931 are not of the authentic Shroud, but of this copy. Thus, Enrie's photographs, which have served as references in sindonological studies for many years, would not be photographs of the authentic Holy Shroud. It's quite possible that this is also the case for the recent photographs taken in 1969 by Giovanni Battista Cordiglia (in color), in 2001 by Aldo Guerresci, and finally in 2008 by the company [https://www.cylex-italia.it/novara/hal9000-srl-8503677.html HAL9000 in Novara].
		+
		+	It would also be the apocryphal copy that would have been the subject of modern scientific analyses, notably those carried out in 1973 by the Pellegrino Commission, by the Shroud Research Project [https://www.shroudofturin.com/sturp.html (S.T.U.R.P)] between 1978 and 1980, and by laboratories in Arizona, Oxford and Zurick in 1988.

---

Version du 1 mars 2024 à 16:22

The Ummans maintain that the real Sindon is kept secret in the Vatican because its scientific analysis from 1902 onwards would have shown the fabric to be impregnated with fresh, unclotted blood, indicating that Jesus did not die on the Cross.

The real Sindon would have been replaced by an artifact manufactured in 1927 and substituted for the authentic one from 1931.

It is this apocryphal copy that is now on public display in Turin. The photographs and analyses carried out since 1969 (Pellegrino), 1978 (STURP) and 1988 (carbon 14) would have been made on this apocryphal copy, leading to a number of confusions'

what is the Holy Shroud or Shroud of Turin?

Photography Secundo Pia, 1898

The Turin Shroud, or Linceul de Turin, is a yellowed linen sheet 4.42 meters long by 1.13 meters wide showing the blurred image (front and back) of a man showing the traces of wounds consistent with crucifixion. It has been preserved since 1578 in the Guarini chapel of Turin's Cathedral of St. John the Baptist.

Since the representation depicts certain details of the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth described in the canonical Gospels, it is the object of popular piety and is considered by the Catholic Church to be an icon. Some believers venerate it as an insignificant relic, the "Holy Shroud".

In 1898, Secondo Pia, an Italian lawyer and photographer, had the opportunity to photograph the Turin Shroud while it was on display in Turin Cathedral. When he developed the photographs, he was surprised to discover that the negative image of the shroud revealed far more detail than was visible to the naked eye. This discovery aroused great interest and paved the way for a series of in-depth scientific studies and research into the shroud.

The negative image obtained by Pia showed very precise anatomical details and facial and body features that seemed to match the accounts of the Crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth as described in the Gospels. This revelation rekindled interest in the shroud and sparked intense debate about its authenticity and origin.

The relic escaped the flames of a fire in 1532, when a blaze ravaged the chapel where it was kept in Chambéry, France, and in 1997 when a fire broke out in the Guarini chapel of the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Turin.

See also: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suaire_de_Turin

Authentication of the Holy Shroud by the Ummans

The Ummans authenticated this relic as early as 1987:

Modèle:Letter.

Beyond this authentication of the Holy Shroud, the Ummans also warn that this relic has been the object of fraud to confuse mankind in its history. The Ummans invite us to verify that Church figures were involved in the substitution of the authentic Holy Shroud by an apocryphal copy.

== Telephone calls about the Holy Shroud

From March 1987 to November 1988, the Ummans began an intense sequence of dozens of letters and 24 telephone calls to two Spanish recipients, Mr. Luis Jiménez Marhuenda and Mr. Jorge Barrenechea.

The subjects of the telephone conversations between the Ummans and the Spanish callers are numerous, but they frequently concern Jesus Christ and the denunciation of the Holy Shroud fraud.

On January 28, 1988, from 1.35pm to 1.50pm, the Ummans announced the dispatch of two important letters:

Modèle:Letter

See also Compilation of extracts from telephone calls about the Holy Shroud

Letters about the Holy Shroud of Turin

Finally, Mr. Jorge Barrenechea will finally be the recipient of 6 important letters, namely:

1998, January, 10, 13 and 20: D 792-1 Les "Oemiiwoa "incarnations cosmiques impulsant l'évolution ( généralités)

1998, January, 20: D 792-2 Life and death of Christ

1988, November, 11: D505: How the Turin Sindon fraud was perpetrated.

1988, November, 11: D518: Gravity of the Turin Shroud fraud / Socio-political stakes of disclosure.

1988, November, 13: D490: Organization of a denunciation meeting concerning the Sindon [ Hotel Sanvy, Madrid ].

1988, November, 13: D499 : Scientific concept of Ommiwoa on planet Ummo - Explanation on scientific analyses of Sindon in 1988

Spanish recipients Antonio Ribera, Ignacio Darnaude, Juan Trigo Gandul will receive:

1988, November, 1: D 488 The fraud on the Turin Shroud (to Darnaude) / Explanation on the Oemmiwoa

See also Oemmiwoa letters from 1987 to 1988 - Holy Shroud

Fraud denunciation conference, Madrid, Hotel Sanvy, 1988

Modèle:Letter

But most surprising of all was the Ummans' initiative in organizing a discreet conference in Madrid, at the Hotel Sanvy on Sunday November 20, 1988.

Modèle:Letter

The historical background to the controversy and the Umma statements =

Jesus Christ would not have died when he came down from the cross

According to the Umma, Jesus of Nazareth was wrapped in a long cloth when he came down from the cross, but he was not dead. On the contrary, they recently clarified that he was under the influence of a powerful drug to simulate his demise. ^[1]

Receiving treatments including ointments made from aloe vera, Jesus is said to have awakened from his deep sleep while wrapped in this cloth or shroud. He would then have resumed his preaching shortly before experiencing a strange phenomenon described in the 1988 letters, namely ASNEEIIBIAEDOO

Modèle:Letter.

Modèle:Letter.

Faced with the historical facts of the controversy surrounding the authenticity of the Turin shroud, Umma's statements provide an alternative perspective. The relevance of their sindonological theses stems from an in-depth knowledge of the history of the Holy Shroud, particularly in modern times.

The shroud of this period (original for the sequel) would therefore bear the scientific proof that the official account of Christ's death would be erroneous, as Christ would not have died on the cross. Letters from 1988 such as D 792-2 also provide the conclusions of the investigations carried out by the Umma expeditionaries.

Indeed, the presence of non-coagulated blood would call into question whether Jesus died on the Cross. And French scientists would have understood this as early as 1902

1902: P. Vignon and R. Colson explained that Jesus did not die on the Cross

Modèle:Letter.

Modèle:Letter.

1902: P. Vignon and R. Colson would also have explained the origin of the imprint

However, from 1902 onwards, examination of the bloodstains on this shroud indicates that the person who bled (Jesus) had not died when it was wrapped, nor in the days that followed. The Ummans pay particular tribute to the seminal work of scientists such as Paul Vignon and René Colson

Modèle:Letter.

Modèle:Letter

Légende : Paul Vignon, 1938, Le Saint-Suaire de Turin, devant la science, l'archéologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique, 2nd edition: Photograph of experiments: "impression by ammoniacal vapors of a plaster rosette, made on a cloth rubbed with aloe powder. The plaster had been immersed for some time in an extended ammonia solution, then partly dried, but not sufficiently: the watercolor stains are due to the fact that too much water remained. The exposure didn't need to exceed half an hour. Below: photographic negative of the print."

a challenge to the fundamental dogmas of the Church

Both Jesus' death on the Cross and the Resurrection episode are founding pillars for the Church's dogmas. The official version of the life of Jesus and therefore the fundamental interpretation of Christianity by the Vatican, but also by other churches, such as the Protestant and Orthodox Churches.

It was the earthquake produced by this questioning by Science as early as 1902 that triggered a series of events.

Observation of the Holy Shroud reveals the presence of fresh blood

Modèle:Letter

Modèle:Letter.

The absence of linen strips (phakiai) in contradiction with Jewish funeral rites

The absence of linen strips on the Turin shroud can be seen as a departure from traditional Jewish funeral practices of Jesus' time, which has contributed to the debate about the shroud's authenticity and origin. The Ummans' explanation would shed new light on these debates.

Linen strips, or "phakiai", were indeed used in Jewish funeral practices of the time, and this is documented in various historical sources (Flavius Josephus and Philo of Alexandria) and religious texts, (Talmud and Midrash ) and finally concordant archaeological observations. Linen strips were often used to wrap the body of the deceased as part of Jewish burial rituals. After the body had been prepared, it was wrapped in linen strips to preserve and protect it during burial. This practice was seen as a sign of respect for the deceased and was an integral part of Jewish funeral rites at the time.

What's more, this difference contradicts the Gospel according to John (John 19:40): "So they took the body of Jesus, and bound it with bindings and spices, as was the custom for burial among the Jews."

Roman Catholic cardinals at the center of the fraud

The Ummans invite us to verify that Church figures were panic-stricken from 1902 onwards, and that a group of cardinals initiated a plot to solve the problem in the first place:

1902 and 1911: unsuccessful first attempt at fraud

Initially, between 1902 and 1911, the cardinals attempted to erase the traces of blood by damaging the authentic relic.

Modèle:Letter

1911 to 1928: production of the definitive apocrypha

Following this highly problematic failure, the Cardinals are said to have embarked on a more methodical scientific study to analyze the technical challenges to be resolved.

After several attempts between 1911 and 1927, the forgers succeeded in producing an apocryphal copy of the authentic Shroud around 1927.

Multiple techniques used

The Ummans detail precisely the multiplicity of different techniques they would have analyzed on the apocryphal copy between 1927 and 1928, including:

Description ( in D 505 )
Selection of fabrics dating from 1220 from the Jaffa region (Palestine).
Use of an original scale copy of Secondo Pia's plates.
Treatment of the canvas with a metal bas-relief heated to varying temperatures (average 248°C, maximum 410°C).
Heating of the print for several months using an electric resistance plate.
Introduction of 2 coin designs that would not appear on the original authentic sindon.
Final touch-up with a gentle rubbing of the cloth.
Wash one part of the sheet with diluted sweat.
Wash other areas with solutions of varying concentrations of sulfuric acid in water.

This leads them to explain:

Modèle:Letter.

Observable differences in fabric structure

The Ummans also provide precise parameters for distinguishing between the original Shroud and its apocryphal copy.

For the apocryphal copy, the forgers used fabric dating from 1220 from the Jaffa region (Palestine).

Modèle:Letter

Furthermore, the fabric of the authentic Shroud could be dated to around the 1st century A.D., notably by Carbon-14 dating.

Photos taken by Giuseppe Enrie in 1931 actually show a "fishbone" fabric structure:

Caption: page VI; Paul Vignon, 1938, Le Saint-Suaire de Turin, devant la science, l'archéologie, l'histoire, l'iconographie, la logique, 2nd edition: Would this enlargement of Giuseppe Enrie's 1931 photos confirm that this is a type 4 twill weave with a structure named by you as "Fishbone" of very irregular gauge of 10.2 for the weft and 3.3 for the warp (the gauge is given in Na of Great Britain)?

The fishbone structure is a form of weaving made by arranging weft wefts by changing direction with each successive stratum, so as to give a "fishbone" appearance with an angle of around 45° between wefts

replacement of the original by the apocryphal copy circa 1929

The cardinals involved would then have replaced the original with a copy around 1929. Ummans are somewhat hesitant about this date:

Modèle:Letter.

The apocryphal copy was close enough to the authentic Shroud for the Cardinals, given the scientific knowledge and analysis techniques available at the time. But the evolution of knowledge and techniques was to prove unexpected and problematic for their plot.

According to the Ummans, the fabric displayed in public ostentations since 1931 is the apocryphal one.

Modèle:Letter.

What's more, the many photographs taken by professional photographer Giuseppe Enrie in May 1931 are not of the authentic Shroud, but of this copy. Thus, Enrie's photographs, which have served as references in sindonological studies for many years, would not be photographs of the authentic Holy Shroud. It's quite possible that this is also the case for the recent photographs taken in 1969 by Giovanni Battista Cordiglia (in color), in 2001 by Aldo Guerresci, and finally in 2008 by the company HAL9000 in Novara.

It would also be the apocryphal copy that would have been the subject of modern scientific analyses, notably those carried out in 1973 by the Pellegrino Commission, by the Shroud Research Project (S.T.U.R.P) between 1978 and 1980, and by laboratories in Arizona, Oxford and Zurick in 1988.

1. ↑ ( cf. 312-Stat-2; October 2021 )