Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dating Of Turin Shroad Was Incorrect
Alpha Galileo ^ | 4-2-2002 | Tatiana Pitchugina

Posted on 04/03/2002 2:34:54 PM PST by blam

Dating Of The Turin Shroad Was Incorrect

For further information, please contact:
Tatiana Pitchugina
Informnauka (Informscience) Agency
textmaster@informnauka.ru
7-095-2675418
02 April 2002

The researchers were allowed a single chance to examine the Turin Shroud. On April 21, 1988 a small piece, its square being about 7 square centimeters, was cut off from the Shroud under the supervision of Cardinal Anastacio Ballestrero, the Archbishop of Turin, and the invited experts. The sample was divided into smaller fragments, which were sent for analyses to the Laboratories of Radiocarbon Analyses of the Arizona University (USA), Oxford University (Great Britain) and the Zurich Federal Polytechnic Institute (Switzerland). Having processed and averaged the analyses results, the scientists came to the conclusion that the Shroud was made within the period of 1260 - 1390. Nevertheless, Russian scientists are confident that the dating was incorrect. They believe that the western experts have disregarded the complicated history of the Shroud when determining its age.

In 1532 the fire broke out in the church of Chambery, where the Shroud was kept. The sacred relic was damaged in the fire - the edges of the Shroud got charred. Later the Shroud was carefully cleaned from dirt and soot and the burned spots were patched. In the 16th century only one method of cloth restoration was at the disposal of medieval specialists. They used to take tatters and wipe the cloth under restoration by hot oil (namely, olive oil, linseed-oil or nut oil). Then the restorers cleaned the cloth with wet fabric, the whole process being repeated over and over again. Russian scientists assume that the Holy Shroud was processed after the fire in this particular way, and the 16th century carbon inevitably penetrated the Shroud cloth, this fact misled the radiocarbon dating in 1988.

However, there is another assumption that the Shroud of Turin was processed by vegetable oil. Some documents testify that in 1508 the Shroud was boiled in the linseed-oil to prove its authenticity. Naturally, such processing caused `rejuvenation` of the carbonic content of the cloth, and the preparation of the Shroud cloth fragments for radiocarbon dating employed by the western scientists failed to remove completely the dried linseed-oil from the Shroud cloth.

Russian experts carried out calculations and experiments with a variety of linen fabric samples. According to the Russian scientists, the Holy Shroud produced at the beginning of A.D. could have been `rejuvenated` by 1300 years due to penetration of as little as 5-7% of vegetable oil into its cloth, the oil penetration could have possibly happened during the earlier restorations and authenticity tests. It is worth noting that the dry cloth retains no visible traces of oiling.

The conclusions of the Russian researchers have confirmed the opinion shared by a lot of western specialists, who believe that the Shroud of Turin should not be studied as an ordinary object, since it has a complicated and incompletely investigated history. Accurate dating requires the development of a unique research program based on the universal expertise.


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: crevolist; datingturinshroad
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

1 posted on 04/03/2002 2:34:54 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer; PatrickHenry; longshadow
ping!
2 posted on 04/03/2002 2:41:44 PM PST by Aracelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
If it was made 1260 - 1390 pray tell how, the contamination has probably made the carbon tests invalid, me no authority but like opinions everyone has one, so to speak.
3 posted on 04/03/2002 2:48:49 PM PST by boomop1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; jennyp; junior; longshadow; crevo_list; RadioAstronomer; Scully; Piltdown_Woman...
Shroud of New Jersey ping.
4 posted on 04/03/2002 3:26:23 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
I think I'll wait for the final consensus from someone who can actually spell shroud correctly.
5 posted on 04/03/2002 3:31:35 PM PST by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
This sounds like one of those "just so" stories that the anti-Evo's complain about so much.

It also reminds me of the line in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" after the young journalist finds out that the hero DIDN'T shoot Valance after all. His more experienced boss tears up the journalist's notes, and speaks with great solemnity:

"If the truth contradicts the legend, print the legend!"

6 posted on 04/03/2002 3:39:32 PM PST by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Shroud of mystery hangs over RightWhale. How do you get from this General Interest Forum to News/Activism?
7 posted on 04/03/2002 3:50:21 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
How do you get from this General Interest Forum to News/Activism?

Do a "self search." In the right-hand column, under "Forums" you'll find a list you can click on.

8 posted on 04/03/2002 3:54:56 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Do a "self search." In the right-hand column, under "Forums" you'll find a list you can click on.

Actually, there is no right-hand column. Nor left-hand, either. Looks like I'm up the creek without a paddle.

9 posted on 04/03/2002 4:07:39 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer; Scully
The post you inquired about from the recently-pulled thread:

You're in trouble when they start writing verse about you!

One Moment in Annihilation's Waste,
One Moment, of the Well of Life to taste---
The Stars are setting and the Caravan
Starts for the Dawn of Nothing---Oh, make haste!

How long, how long, in infinite Pursuit
Of This and That endeavour signal and dispute?
Better be merry with the fruitful Grape
Than sadden after none, or bitter, Fruit.

Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam (Edward FitzGerald's Translation)
PatrickHenry's modification


10 posted on 04/03/2002 4:12:36 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
So who misbehaved on the "Ohio" thread?
11 posted on 04/03/2002 4:14:53 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
So who misbehaved on the "Ohio" thread?

There's been much private speculation, but no hard information. I wasn't on FR when it happened, so I know nothing.

12 posted on 04/03/2002 4:26:17 PM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Eloquent! :) Thank you for re-posting!
13 posted on 04/03/2002 4:44:58 PM PST by Scully
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: blam
However, there is another assumption that the Shroud of Turin was processed by vegetable oil. Some documents testify that in 1508 the Shroud was boiled in the linseed-oil to prove its authenticity. Naturally, such processing caused `rejuvenation` of the carbonic content of the cloth, and the preparation of the Shroud cloth fragments for radiocarbon dating employed by the western scientists failed to remove completely the dried linseed-oil from the Shroud cloth.

The half-life of C14 is 5730 years. Let's suppose that the Shroud of Turin, as it exists today, contains a mass of carbon atoms that is composed of two populations: a mass M1 of atoms from the original Shroud, and a mass M2 of atoms that it acquired in the cleaning process. Let's further suppose that the Shroud is 2000 years old, but that the cleaning process happened 470 years ago.

What percentage of the Shroud's carbon atoms would have to come from the cleaning process, in order to make it look like it's 700 years old?

In each population, the C14 fraction equals the original C14 fraction times 2-t/tau, where t is the elapsed time and tau is the half life (5730 years). For a 2000-year-old object, that fraction is .785; for a 470-year-old object, that fraction is .945; for a 700-year-old object, that fraction is .919.

.919 (M1+M2) = .785(M1) + .945(M2), which implies that M2 is more than 5 times greater than M1. In other words, the Shround as we see it today would have to be five parts 470-year-old linseed oil and one part 2000-year-old Shroud, in order to corrupt the analysis to the degree claimed.

14 posted on 04/03/2002 4:52:25 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riley1992
"I think I'll wait for the final consensus from someone who can actually spell shroud correctly."

You did see that that was the way they spelled it, didn't you? JimRob does not like us to change titles. (You say Taleban I say Taliban, etc.)

15 posted on 04/03/2002 5:04:30 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I am reminded of "Rocky & Bullwinkle" everytime the Rubiyat is mentioned. Remember the Kurwood Derby and The Ruby Yacht Of Omar Kayyam? Classic.
16 posted on 04/03/2002 5:07:47 PM PST by RangeRatt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
". In other words, the Shround as we see it today would have to be five parts 470-year-old linseed oil and one part 2000-year-old Shroud, in order to corrupt the analysis to the degree claimed."

That could be possible, couldn't it?

17 posted on 04/03/2002 5:08:53 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
You clearly don't understand with all your silly math. Any contamination, a fruit fly's urine, means creationists may assume any date they want. It's in the crevo-thread FAQ, right under "Gaps in the evidence are evidence for ID/creationism."
18 posted on 04/03/2002 5:13:03 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RangeRatt
the Kurwood Derby

Not a reference to old Omar the Tent-Maker, but Durward Kirby of "the Gary Moore Show." God, I'm getting old!

19 posted on 04/03/2002 5:15:02 PM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: blam
LOL. Yes, I saw that. My comment wasn't meant to be directed to you. It was to the author of the piece.
20 posted on 04/03/2002 5:17:13 PM PST by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson