[madison10]

The "Carbon dating" showed the 1350 due it (The Shroud) being in a fire.

[theDentist]

I believe that theory has not been duplicated. It's a possibility, but remains unproven. In their defense, it's very difficult to recreate the environment in which the burns/smoke impacted the shroud. But the older elements of the pieces tested would have revealed an earlier date.

[smith288]

Its just a cloth real or not. Try not to focus on the object so much and focus on Christ and his Message.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

Right! They cannot "definitively" date it. But I found in every documentary I've watched, that the scientists cannot DISPROVE it's authenticity either!

They always say it is a very distinct possibility that the shroud is REAL!

[Doctor Stochastic]

No. If you do the computations, fire contamination would not lead to a big date change (unless several times the weight of the shroud were added in soot.)

[Swordmaker]

The "Carbon dating" showed the 1350 due it (The Shroud) being in a fire.

While some carbon from exterior sources may have contaminated the cloth, it could not have been in sufficient amounts to skew the carbon dating.

The reason the carbon dating is off is that the sample itself was composed of between 45- 60%15-16th century linen from a repair that is obvious in micrographs of the area sampled. The percentage of original thread to replaced thread depended on which piece of the sample each lab got as the boundary between original to replaced thread ran diagonally through the original clipped sample!

In fact the sample ages reported by the three labs shows this change in percentage as the labs reported ages that were wildly variant between the labs with the oldest age (plus margin of error) being outside of the youngest age and ITS margin of error. The sample testing at the youngest age had the largest percentage of newer material while the oldest had the lowest percentage of newer material.