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
GGG Ping.
Wonder why they didn't recognize it as a patch in 1988.
bump
> Wonder why they didn't recognize it as a patch in 1988.
Probably because the Shroud-fans didn't need the excuse yet.
I would hope this would pave the way for performing another radioactive carbon dating test of the main cloth.
So how old is it? I must have reading comprehension problems today; I can't find how old they now think it is.
Carbon-14 testing isn't very reliable if you ask me. I've never thought the shroud to be authentic.
The shroud question is a fascinating one...an argument is almost certain to break out whenever it's mentioned!
Probably because the Shroud-fans didn't need the excuse yet.
The science/facts/logic behind your response dazzle me. Are you a troll or just not used to FR yet?
Ping.
Da Vinci is still laughing.
I'll take one of those, with extra butter, please. Can I get you a cold one, while I'm up?
I was in Torino last year and went to the church where it is stored. Although you can only see pictures and copies and other memorabilia now, they have done a great job in the presentation, including a computer model of what the person in the shroud looked like.
Needless to say, I was quite moved and thought it was authentic despite the evidence from the Carbon dating test (which may now be questionsable).
I would encourage you to go and see for yourself....
It is, actually, when used on suitable samples. Unfortunately, a favorite trick of young-earth creationists is to use it on samples known to be inappropriate for 14C testing, and then use the (not surprisingly) invalid results as "proof" that radiocarbon dating is "inaccurate".
Perhaps they though that an older result would have been obtained.
Why not do radiocarbon dating on the part now claimed to be "old"?
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Sure! Nothing's too good for you!
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.