Shroud of turin carbon dating flaws consolidating 4

12-Jul-2017 19:30

Now I don't totally agree that the reason the Shroud was carbon-dated to around 1325 AD was because the bacteria and mould on the cloth was 700 years old.

But I do agree that the bacteria and mould on the Shroud, being more recent carbon, would have markedly skewed the radiocarbon age of the Shroud to make it appear to be younger than its actual chronological age. Harry Gove, co-founder of the AMS radiocarbon method used to date the Shroud also agreed, that the "bioplastic coating of the linen fibrils could not have been removed even by the most stringent pretreatment cleaning process and would, definitely, skew the real age of the linen":"The C-14) test performed at the Arizona AMS clearly showed a wide discrepancy, on the average of 550) years between the linen and the bird's body.

But it was surprising that the example of radiocarbon dating cited was that of the Shroud of Turin.

And what was astonishing (to me at least) was that the textbook actually debunked the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, by pointing out that after that radiocarbon dating which "indicated the cloth was only around 700 years old," "further tests were done" and "These proved that only the bacteria and mould on the cloth were around 700 years old," and so "The mystery continues":"One famous object that has been radiocarbon dated is the Shroud of Turin - said by some to be the cloth in which Christ was wrapped after his crucifixion.

These tests, carried out in the late 1980s, indicated the cloth was only around 700 years old. These proved that only the bacteria and mould on the cloth were around 700 years old. Written records confirm the cloth did exist in 1357." (Easton, M., et al., "SOSE Alive 1: Studies of Society and Environment," John Wiley and Sons: Milton QLD, 2003, p.15).

Unfortunately there was no time to discuss the dating of the Shroud in class, but many of the students in that class (and innumerable students across Australia since the book was first published in 2002) would have read that paragraph and would have absorbed its take-home message that the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin as being only 700 years old, was flawed.

This website focuses on the latest dating challenges of the Shroud of Turin.

Although most Christians consider the Shroud to be the genuine burial cloth of Jesus, the results of the 1988 c-14 (carbon-14) dating has been puzzling.

"Final results show that the Shroud fibres examined produced the following dates, all of which are 95% certain and centuries away from the medieval dating obtained with Carbon-14 testing in 1988: the dates given to the Shroud after FT-IR testing, is 300 BC 400, 200 BC 500 after Raman testing and 400 AD 400 after multi-parametric mechanical testing.Firm believers in the authenticity of the Shroud were confident of a serious dating error (or incredible oversight in the c-14 dating process).We dedicate this website to the remembrance Brendan Whiting, who's 2006 book "The Shroud Story" introduced the world to the most powerful evidence that the 1988 Shroud c-14 data (dating the Shroud in the 14th Century) was invalid.Major findings: No significant trace of paint, Ink, dye, or stain. Image becomes life like when their light values are reversed by a photographic negative. C) Shoulder abrasions D) Knee abrasions E) scourage marks F) nail wounds in hands and feet G) wound in side. The shroud has been damaged in a fire, restored, repaired, and has passed through many hands.The Blood is real blood that has been confirmed by Dr. The Wounds are consistent with the Gospel account of Christ's ordeal. These things all make it harder to get an actual dating on it.

"Final results show that the Shroud fibres examined produced the following dates, all of which are 95% certain and centuries away from the medieval dating obtained with Carbon-14 testing in 1988: the dates given to the Shroud after FT-IR testing, is 300 BC 400, 200 BC 500 after Raman testing and 400 AD 400 after multi-parametric mechanical testing.

Firm believers in the authenticity of the Shroud were confident of a serious dating error (or incredible oversight in the c-14 dating process).

We dedicate this website to the remembrance Brendan Whiting, who's 2006 book "The Shroud Story" introduced the world to the most powerful evidence that the 1988 Shroud c-14 data (dating the Shroud in the 14th Century) was invalid.

Major findings: No significant trace of paint, Ink, dye, or stain. Image becomes life like when their light values are reversed by a photographic negative. C) Shoulder abrasions D) Knee abrasions E) scourage marks F) nail wounds in hands and feet G) wound in side. The shroud has been damaged in a fire, restored, repaired, and has passed through many hands.

The Blood is real blood that has been confirmed by Dr. The Wounds are consistent with the Gospel account of Christ's ordeal. These things all make it harder to get an actual dating on it.

"All empirical evidence and logical reasoning concerning the shroud of Turin will lead any objective, rational person to the firm conclusion that the shroud is an artifact created by an artist in the fourteenth-century."The "shroud" of Turin is a woven cloth about 14 feet long and 3.5 feet wide with an image of a man on it.