[Alberta's Child]

Until something uncontrovertable comes along, I will remain firmly on the side of those that say its the longest running hoax in history.

Even in science there is really no such thing as "uncontrovertable" when it comes to something like this. You act as if Carbon-14 dating is the definitive evidence in this case.

If you go back and look at all of the evidence related to the Shroud, you'll find (even before this latest piece of evidence was made known) that the probability of someone creating this on their own back in the 11th or 12th century was extremely remote. In particular, there is no question that the Shroud was "created" using a process that is identical to photography, when in fact photography was not invented until the 19th century. The notion that someone would develop a primitive form of technology 700 or 800 years earlier than this -- without leaving any other evidence of it for this period of time -- seems so highly improbable that I would consider it an "article of faith" that can't possibly be substantiated.

[Badeye]

"Even in science there is really no such thing as "uncontrovertable" when it comes to something like this. You act as if Carbon-14 dating is the definitive evidence in this case. "

You misunderstand me. I'm acting as thought I have witnessed dozen's of "Churchs" deceive the various "flocks".

While I have seen the carbon 14 data related to this, my view is much more of a result of forty years of church scandals from across the entire spectrum that I have witnessed.

As I noted, I fully believe in God....how can anyone look up at the night sky and not?

I have a huge problem buying into the institutions of Man raised up in worship of God, however....for the obvious, well documented reasons.

I'm not besmirching anyone else's faith, or belief. Just staing my viewpoint.

[leadhead]

Perhaps it's the Shroud of Bob, Jesus' brother. (Arrogant Worms Reference)

[mtbopfuyn]

Did you forget that DaVince was playing around with photography way back then? No, please don't get started on the DaVince Code because this was known before the book was written.

[the OlLine Rebel]

Additionally, I have a question about the whole Carbon-14 thing.

Now, I'm not a scientist in any such respecting such archaelogy or historical studies, but I am of scientific background. Just not that branch.

However, I don't recall the half-life of U237/9 (whatever it is) specifically, but I thought it was around 1500 years. In any case, since I went to college I've wondered how this carbon-dating could figure anything *older* than that? W/the Shroud, I've always thought that if it's around 2000 years, how could this method ever possibly prove it to be so?

[Aquinasfan]

The notion that someone would develop a primitive form of technology 700 or 800 years earlier than this -- without leaving any other evidence of it for this period of time -- seems so highly improbable that I would consider it an "article of faith" that can't possibly be substantiated.

Exactly. The Shroud's authenticity is highly probable, given the scientific evidence. If one rejects miracles a priori, then no amount of evidence, scientific or otherwise, will suffice.

[TASMANIANRED]

"Even in science there is really no such thing as "uncontrovertable" when it comes to something like this. You act as if Carbon-14 dating is the definitive evidence in this case. "

One of the big ugly secrets in this carbon dating B/S. You cannot carbon date an impregnable surface like this that has been in a fire. The primary byproduct of fire is carbon in the form of smoke. They were testing a fabric of unknown origion but the structures that burned dated from the middle ages. They confirmed the date of the fire and nothing more.