Perhaps these patches would better reflect the original posting:
Or this:
Posted on 01/19/2005 11:46:04 AM PST by blam
New Chemical Testing Points to Ancient Origin for Burial Shroud of Jesus; Los Alamos Scientist Proves 1988 Carbon-14 Dating of the Shroud of Turin Used Invalid Rewoven Sample
Wednesday January 19, 8:32 am ET
DALLAS, Jan. 19 /PRNewswire/ -- The American Shroud of Turin Association for Research (AMSTAR), a scientific organization dedicated to research on the enigmatic Shroud of Turin, thought by many to be the burial cloth of the crucified Jesus of Nazareth, announced today that the 1988 Carbon-14 test was not done on the original burial cloth, but rather on a rewoven shroud patch creating an erroneous date for the actual age of the Shroud. The Shroud of Turin is a large piece of linen cloth that shows the faint full-body image of a blood-covered man on its surface. Because many believe it to be the burial cloth of Jesus, researchers have tried to determine its origin though numerous modern scientific methods, including Carbon-14 tests done at three radiocarbon labs which set the age of the artifact at between AD 1260 and 1390.
"Now conclusive evidence, gathered over the past two years, proves that the sample used to date the Shroud was actually taken from an expertly-done rewoven patch," says AMSTAR President, Tom D'Muhala. "Chemical testing indicates that the linen Shroud is actually very old -- much older than the published 1988 radiocarbon date."
"As unlikely as it seems, the sample used to test the age of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was taken from a rewoven area of the Shroud," reports chemist Raymond Rogers, a fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Rogers' new findings are published in the current issue of Thermochimica Acta, a chemistry peer reviewed scientific journal.
"Pyrolysis-mass-spectrometry results from the sample area coupled with microscopic and microchemical observations prove that the radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of Turin which is currently housed at The Turin Cathedral in Italy," says Rogers.
"The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic," explains Rogers. "The sample tested was dyed using technology that began to appear in Italy about the time the Crusaders' last bastion fell to the Mameluke Turks in AD 1291. The radiocarbon sample cannot be older than about AD 1290, agreeing with the age determined in 1988. However, the Shroud itself is actually much older."
Rogers' new research clearly disproves the 1988 findings announced by British Museum spokesperson, Mike Tite, when he declared that the Shroud was of medieval origin and probably "a hoax." The British Museum coordinated the 1988 radiocarbon tests and acted as the official clearing house for all findings.
Almost immediately, Shroud analysts questioned the validity of the sample used for radiocarbon dating. Researchers using high-resolution photographs of the Shroud found indications of an "invisible" reweave in the area used for testing. However, belief tilted strongly toward the more "scientific" method of radiocarbon dating. Rogers' recent analysis of an authentic sample taken from the radiocarbon sample proves that the researchers were right to question the 1988 results.
As a result of his own research and chemical tests, Rogers concluded that the radiocarbon sample was cut from a medieval patch, and is totally different in composition from the main part of the Shroud of Turin.
Contact: Michael Minor (972) 932-5141
The napkin is in Oviedo, Spain. It's called the Sudarium of Oviedo.
So are they going to try to get a piece from the original shroud for testing?
But it could be 7000 years.
The 'Shroud Fans' as you call us, didn't accept those findings because we KNEW the sample was from one of the repairs done in the middle ages. I'm not a scientist and I don't play one on TV, but I WAS paying attention, something the researchers who went into this with an obvious bias did not. There was plenty of evidence that the Shroud was from the First Century AD in Judea, from botanical evidence to knowledge of burial practices, but that was ignored in favor or the radiocarbon findings.
the napkin's blood pattern matches the shroud's exactly, from what I understand. Adds a whole new level of intrigue to the subject.
The you haven't heard of this: http://www.shroudstory.com/faq-sudarium.htm
If the original cloth has blood stains on it, a DNA sample would certainly be interesting.
Was there anything in his post indicating he proscribes to that particular supernatural myth?
Negra Modelo? I'll have to check that brewski out.
Moreover, I can't find any description of the dating technique they used, other than that it's "chemical".
Your shroud-fans comment was demeaning with no proof...smelled similar to a redneck accusation. While I don't know myself what to think of the shroud, I do like the fact that people are using science to figure it out. Your comment on that science was ... useless.
> shroud-fans comment was demeaning
Calling someone a "fan" is demeaning?
OH MY GOD!!! I've slipped into Bizarro World, where Free Republic is Democratic Underground!!!
>There was plenty of evidence that the Shroud was from the First Century AD in Judea, from botanical evidence to knowledge of burial practices, but that was ignored in favor or the radiocarbon findings.
And the chemical and microphotograph data that showed that the "blood" was (tempura?) paint.
> Not being a dishonest person I can't see how someone could decide to create a shroud and pass it off as authentic.
Here's a hint: early Democrats. Dan Blather had his people forged up a shroud.
The article should've been dubbed "No Date".
There are people who believe Jesus survived the crusifixion(sp) and he and Mary moved to France, had more childeren and lived to a ripe old age. There are people in France who claim be be descendents from the children of Mary and Jesus.
Not if you read the recent research less the carbon dating fiasco. The book 'The Resurrection of the Shroud' is a good starting point.
Don't forget this is the Lord we are talking about here. The shroud would never have had to actually touch His body for it to bear His Holy image. He could've willed it to be so and it would have happened.
While you're reading the scriptures don't forget about context and faith.
"Did you ever, even for a split second, consider what it would mean if even one of these apparitions were true?"
Did you ever consider, for a split second, the increasingly diminishing likelyhood that even one is?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.