圣物和圣餐奇迹中AB型血的科学分析:对Franco Serafini评论的回复。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, LEGAL
Kelly P Kearse
{"title":"圣物和圣餐奇迹中AB型血的科学分析:对Franco Serafini评论的回复。","authors":"Kelly P Kearse","doi":"10.1007/s12024-025-01003-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the recent paper entitled \"The relics of Jesus and Eucharistic miracles: scientific analysis of shared AB blood type\" the issue was raised that assignment of AB blood type using serological methods with such articles may be difficult due to the shared nature of AB antigens between humans and bacteria. Moreover, it was pointed out that examination of unique polymorphic markers would be required to validate a single source of origin. In a responsive commentary, Serafini has argued that because serological AB techniques have proven useful for certain (unrelated) studies in the past, the validity of such findings with relics is therefore convincing, even though environmental conditions are markedly different. In addition, he makes several assertions regarding the extensive use of control groups that confuse results obtained with relics with those of Eucharistic miracles, which should be considered separately. Serafini's main concern is that excessive scientific prudence will put people off a topic such as the scientific study of Eucharistic miracles. Unfortunately, this viewpoint fails to realize that incautious scientific investigation of such subjects may, in fact, be of much greater harm in the long run. Specific responses to the key points raised in Serafini's commentary are discussed below.</p>","PeriodicalId":12449,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientific analysis of shared AB blood type among relics and eucharistic miracles: A reply to Franco Serafini's commentary.\",\"authors\":\"Kelly P Kearse\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12024-025-01003-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the recent paper entitled \\\"The relics of Jesus and Eucharistic miracles: scientific analysis of shared AB blood type\\\" the issue was raised that assignment of AB blood type using serological methods with such articles may be difficult due to the shared nature of AB antigens between humans and bacteria. Moreover, it was pointed out that examination of unique polymorphic markers would be required to validate a single source of origin. In a responsive commentary, Serafini has argued that because serological AB techniques have proven useful for certain (unrelated) studies in the past, the validity of such findings with relics is therefore convincing, even though environmental conditions are markedly different. In addition, he makes several assertions regarding the extensive use of control groups that confuse results obtained with relics with those of Eucharistic miracles, which should be considered separately. Serafini's main concern is that excessive scientific prudence will put people off a topic such as the scientific study of Eucharistic miracles. Unfortunately, this viewpoint fails to realize that incautious scientific investigation of such subjects may, in fact, be of much greater harm in the long run. Specific responses to the key points raised in Serafini's commentary are discussed below.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-025-01003-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, LEGAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-025-01003-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, LEGAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在最近一篇题为“耶稣的遗物和圣餐奇迹:共享AB血型的科学分析”的论文中,提出了一个问题,即由于人类和细菌之间AB抗原的共同性质,使用血清学方法对此类文章进行AB血型的分配可能很困难。此外,有人指出,检验独特的多态性标记将需要验证一个单一的来源。在一篇回应性评论中,塞拉菲尼认为,由于血清学AB技术在过去的某些(不相关的)研究中被证明是有用的,因此,即使环境条件明显不同,这些发现对文物的有效性也是令人信服的。此外,他还提出了一些关于广泛使用控制组的主张,这些控制组混淆了从圣物中获得的结果和从圣餐奇迹中获得的结果,这应该分开考虑。塞拉菲尼主要担心的是,过度的科学谨慎会使人们对圣餐奇迹的科学研究等话题失去兴趣。不幸的是,这种观点没有认识到,从长远来看,对这些问题不谨慎的科学调查实际上可能会造成更大的危害。下面将讨论对塞拉菲尼评论中提出的关键点的具体回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Scientific analysis of shared AB blood type among relics and eucharistic miracles: A reply to Franco Serafini's commentary.

In the recent paper entitled "The relics of Jesus and Eucharistic miracles: scientific analysis of shared AB blood type" the issue was raised that assignment of AB blood type using serological methods with such articles may be difficult due to the shared nature of AB antigens between humans and bacteria. Moreover, it was pointed out that examination of unique polymorphic markers would be required to validate a single source of origin. In a responsive commentary, Serafini has argued that because serological AB techniques have proven useful for certain (unrelated) studies in the past, the validity of such findings with relics is therefore convincing, even though environmental conditions are markedly different. In addition, he makes several assertions regarding the extensive use of control groups that confuse results obtained with relics with those of Eucharistic miracles, which should be considered separately. Serafini's main concern is that excessive scientific prudence will put people off a topic such as the scientific study of Eucharistic miracles. Unfortunately, this viewpoint fails to realize that incautious scientific investigation of such subjects may, in fact, be of much greater harm in the long run. Specific responses to the key points raised in Serafini's commentary are discussed below.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology
Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology MEDICINE, LEGAL-PATHOLOGY
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
114
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Forensic Science, Medicine and Pathology encompasses all aspects of modern day forensics, equally applying to children or adults, either living or the deceased. This includes forensic science, medicine, nursing, and pathology, as well as toxicology, human identification, mass disasters/mass war graves, profiling, imaging, policing, wound assessment, sexual assault, anthropology, archeology, forensic search, entomology, botany, biology, veterinary pathology, and DNA. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology presents a balance of forensic research and reviews from around the world to reflect modern advances through peer-reviewed papers, short communications, meeting proceedings and case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信