Skip to comments.New: Shroud of Turin carbon dating proved erroneous ( performed on non-original cloth sample)
Posted on 09/28/2008 8:19:34 AM PDT by dascallie
PRESS RELEASE: Los Alamos National Laboratory team of scientists prove carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin wrong
COLUMBUS, Ohio, August 15 In his presentation today at The Ohio State Universitys Blackwell Center, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) chemist, Robert Villarreal, disclosed startling new findings proving that the sample of material used in 1988 to Carbon-14 (C-14) date the Shroud of Turin, which categorized the cloth as a medieval fake, could not have been from the original linen cloth because it was cotton. According to Villarreal, who lead the LANL team working on the project, thread samples they examined from directly adjacent to the C-14 sampling area were definitely not linen and, instead, matched cotton. Villarreal pointed out that the  age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case. Villarreal also revealed that, during testing, one of the threads came apart in the middle forming two separate pieces. A surface resin, that may have been holding the two pieces together, fell off and was analyzed. Surprisingly, the two ends of the thread had different chemical compositions, lending credence to the theory that the threads were spliced together during a repair. LANLs work confirms the research published in Thermochimica Acta (Jan. 2005) by the late Raymond Rogers, a chemist who had studied actual C-14 samples and concluded the sample was not part of the original cloth possibly due to the area having been repaired. This hypothesis was presented by M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino in Orvieto, Italy in 2000. Benford and Marino proposed that a 16th Century patch of cotton/linen material was skillfully spliced into the 1st Century original Shroud cloth in the region ultimately used for dating. The intermixed threads combined to give the dates found by the labs ranging between 1260 and 1390 AD. Benford and Marino contend that this expert repair was necessary to disguise an unauthorized relic taken from the corner of the cloth. A paper presented today at the conference by Benford and Marino, and to be published in the July/August issue of the international journal Chemistry Today, provided additional corroborating evidence for the repair theory.
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2008
Conference Scientist responds to Raleigh News and Observer story on the Shroud of Turin
T. V. Oommen writes in a letter published by the paper:
I am responding to the Aug. 29 article Scientists debate shrouds date. As a scientist involved in the shrouds study and research, and as a participant in the recent Ohio Shroud Conference where I made a presentation on Shroud coins dating by image extraction, I can emphatically say that there is plenty of evidence for the antiquity of the shroud as of first century origin.
There were several presentations on the erroneous dating of the shroud by the 1988 radiocarbon(C-14) dating. The area where the samples were taken was from a medieval patch with cotton, which appeared to blend perfectly with the linen shroud. If this is true, the main body of the shroud should show an ancient date. The theory that the entire shroud could show a more recent date because of the newer carbon generated during fiery events remains to be proven.
Some other scientists also propose similar views; for example, that powerful radiations from the resurrection event must have generated C-14. So another carbon dating of the shroud may not resolve the issue.
The coin identification I presented showed Pontius Pilate coins issued AD 30/31 placed on the eye area, which implies the shrouds age is very close to that. Read more about it at www.ohioshroudconference.com.
In defense of the scientists, the Vatican did not allow them to take a representative sample of the shroud.
What difference does it make? Do we really need to spend good money on this. If people believe it’s real, fine. If they don’t fine.
Not my money.
One of the biggest enigmas of our age I’d say. Foundation for the miraculous and Christian belief system.
It is looking more and more like it is an authentic artifact from the time of Jesus’ death...with an inexplicable image embedded into it. That really shakes up the reality map of some people.
Yes I’d say it worth out time and investment without a doubt.
One’s faith shouldn’t be incumbent of the Shroud ~ which I happen to believe is real.
By the same token, if it were proved not to be of Christ’s time that should also not refute one’s faith.
It seems to me that there are a lot of factions that have an interest in this who are not greatly concerned with the truth.
>It seems to me that there are a lot of factions that have an interest in this who are not greatly concerned with the truth.>
As in all things these days unfortunately ( ie, Obama religion).
Seems we are living in a relative scale of what is deemed “true” and “untrue” nowadays.
I don’t think taxpayers are paying for this.
But I’m happy to hear this. I’ll take any good news I can these days.
A relic isn’t everything, but neither is it nothing.
Personally, I’d like all the answers we can get, while we can still get them; before the muslims carbonize Turin, Rome, and all of Christian Europe.
Sorry the shroud has zero to do with my faith, and while I can't speak for others, I suspect it has zero to do with theirs.
who’s we? I didn’t know that you’d ponied up any money for this project.
Faith alone is all that is required. In addition, it's nice that science has never been able to replicate the shroud image using the most modern of techniques.
I was in northen Italy last Novemeber on business and visited Turin. The church is in the downtown area and was sadly closed. The feelings I had walking by the church was simply awe inspiring.
Not your money jack. None of your business. Don’t waste our time eh!
Yes, I over spoke....it is not alone the foundation..I should say, it is emblematic of the foundation ( the ressurection).
Further, I also agree whether this relic was proven or disproven, faith is not anchored by that data point, faith is infinitely more complex—however the shroud relic is quite mystical and inspiring. Possibly a divine bit of evidence of the miraculous.
That the previous testing was flawed isn’t new, but I don’t recall the detail of the cotton fibers in previous articles.
The Shroud remains a fascinating puzzle. I see you already pinged Shroudie.
It is rather interesting, but it should not much affect one’s belief system either way. It would be nice if this relic indicated that Jesus was resurrected (I don’t see how a relic can prove anything, however). I do think the Roman Catholic and Eastern churches make too much of relics, because this this can be abused to distract people from things more important. I am not saying every such thing is abused, just that there is a real danger of abuse. Some Protestants have the same problem, selling prayer cloths that are supposed to heal people, etc. Not that I put the Shrowd at the same level as what some fake preacher is selling.
Ahhhh....no. Christian faith doesn’t need any supposed relics, real or fake, as a foundation. God’s Word provides the foundation and the real enigma is why anyone today would spend their time pursuing such things.
Thanks for the ping!
The great minds can date a scrap of wood a thousand years old but cannot date a few scraps of cloth?
I have spent more than a month reading Everything on the shroud. It is a medieval fake without a doubt. These goobers at Los Alamos are not representing Los Alamos, they are part of STURP. STURP's whole history has been to try and undermine the science and history that shows the shroud to be a fake. Three separate labs carbon dated the shroud to no earlier than 1290. The repair crap came from Benford and Marino, famous for their "studies" of spontaneous human combustion and the ability of pyramids to sharpen razors. Photographs of the samples analyzed show them to be 3:1 weave like the rest of the shroud and NO THREADS ARE MISSING. NO scientist at the three labs that did the tests doubt their findings. The Los Alamos/STURP goobers were deliberately excluded from the C-14 tests and they have repeatedly tried to reinsert themselves into the process.
The Raes sample was NOT adjacent to the samples tested, but the Vatican DOES have the piece that was next to it. It was examined by experts under high powered microscopes and was found to have a (bioplastic film), but its authenticity wasn't questioned. The Thermochemica Acta article referenced has been thoroughly refuted. If the Vatican wants additional testing done, they have a sample in hand that could be used without disturbing the shroud, but they won't do it because they know it will verify that it is a fake.
The veracity of the STURP scientists has never been invalidated. To the contrary. You are spinning misinformaiton.
What are your credentials? A “month” of internet data seeking? ...sites with a clear skeptic pov?
I’ve also read exhaustively about this ....much longer than a “month” I assure you...more like 15 years. I also know all about the Sue Benford and Joseph Marino data.
It is well known that the shroud was patched by nuns during the fire of 1532 and that molten silver also dropped on portions of it at that time as well . All documented.
Barry Swortz, the official STURP documenting photographer in 1988— maintians the best Shroud website is a devout JEW, never converted to Christainity and yet he firmly believes this is the first century burial cloth if the man Jesus. See below: from http://www.shroud.com/message.htm
It is with great pride and excitement that I welcome you to this web site. My name is Barrie M. Schwortz, and I am your host. As the Official Documenting Photographer for the Shroud of Turin Research Project, Inc., (STURP), I was privileged to be a member of the team that completed the first extensive scientific examination of the Shroud of Turin in 1978. Between October 8 and October 14, 1978, our team spent 120 hours with the Shroud of Turin.
In the earliest stages of my involvement , I wondered whether someone raised as an Orthodox Jew should be a part of such a “Christian” project. Even then I clearly understood that this was probably the most important relic of Christianity. In my heart I asked myself, “Should I be a part of this?” But my good friend and fellow team member, the late Don Lynn, of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab, was quick to remind me that the man in question was also a Jew. He urged me to “go to Turin and do the best job possible” and worry about “why and for what purpose” when I got back. He suggested that one day, I would know. I have never regretted taking his advice.
Now, over twenty years later, my “purpose” has become very clear. As the Documenting Photographer for the project, I felt a responsibility to complete what I began, and make available some of the 2700 photographs and other materials I collected during the four years of the project. And finally tell the story of what took place in my own words and from my perspective. Frankly, I am still Jewish, yet I believe the Shroud of Turin is the cloth that wrapped the man Jesus after he was crucified. That is not meant as a religious statement, but one based on my privileged position of direct involvement with many of the serious Shroud researchers in the world, and a thorough knowledge of the scientific data, unclouded by media exaggeration and hype. The only reason I am still involved with the Shroud of Turin is because knowing the unbiased facts continues to convince me of its authenticity. And I believe only a handful of people have really ever had access to all the unbiased facts. Most of the public has had to depend on the media, who always seem to sensationalize the story or reduce the facts to two minute sound bites from so-called experts who have “solved the mystery.” Very few of these “experts” ever took the time to research the subject, perhaps in part because so much of the information was hard to find.
So my purpose has become very clear. This website was built to give you, the viewer, an opportunity to have access to the same information that the researchers have used in their study of the Shroud. In fact, this site gives you access to the research itself in many cases.
Over the years, my photographs have been used by Shroud researchers and have appeared in many books, magazines, scientific journals, films and television documentaries. Now, this website allows you to examine those same high quality photographs of the Shroud, review scientific papers and articles, find books and other information, access Shroud resources, obtain Shroud materials and even interact directly with Shroud researchers. (Think of it as the first Interactive Center for Shroud Study in Cyberspace!) And all without anyone insisting that you accept their “theory” about the image on the Shroud of Turin. After all, intelligent people, given the facts, should be able to decide for themselves.
The goal is to make this website the definitive Internet resource for Shroud study in the 21st century. Your active participation is necessary for that goal to be achieved. So thank you for joining me. I hope you find the material on this site useful in your search to “see for yourself.”
Barrie M. Schwortz
1094 Highland Meadows Drive
Florissant, CO 80816, U.S.A
Thanks for the info dascallie.
I am much smarter than you and my one month is worth more than your 15 years. I will prove it.
Do you agree with Raymond N. Rogers theory?, "Rogers suspected contamination and, more important, reported that threads from the 1988 samples contain no vanillin, a compound in flax that gradually disappears. By his calculations, the shroud is 1,300 to 3,000 years old. Though it's possible the cloth dates from Jesus' lifetime, Rogers noted, actual connection to Jesus can never be proven."
And where does the Los Alamos National Laboratory team gets it finances?
I’m willing to bet that the Shroud of Turin is at least as authentic as a religious relic as the ‘magic rock’ in the black cube in Mecca.
Whatever they do they do it with my money, not yours. Barney Frank is flushing yours down the toilet as we speak.
This is new? Or are the scientists finally getting around to presenting the papers. I thought this was all released a few years back.
It is believed, in Islam, that the rock and some other objects there constituted a device previously identified as Abraham's Altar.
The black rock is, itself, embedded in a stainless steel bracket. The bracket was devised some time in the Middle Ages when the Arabs developed stainless steel (easy to do if you have iron/nickel meteorites around).
This device is housed in a structure with a large black curtain around it.
Many people believe the large black curtain and the structure to be, in fact, a rock. They are not. The rock is far smaller. I have several neighbors who have touched it.
I would be intereted in what all you have read.
Wow! Thank you for that link, dascallie. I didn’t know about that one.
Here's what you are having a problem with ~ the sheer mass and volume of representative works from the First Century AD.
Ain't much there.
In fact, there's so little of it they are now reduced to scouring the bottom of an Egyptian public latrine because it was found to contain parchment text from an ancient Torah.
Going back much futher, to 3000 years, our manuscript remains are really, really slim.
It's possible such an item (an ancient Torah of an unknown Jewish sect) served as a source for much of the Koran. You'd have to have special conditions to keep it in shape for early Medieval Damascene scribes to work with it ~ e.g. a very dry cave near Mecca ~ kind of what Mohammad said ~
Other than that everything is carved in stone or mud.
Ancient cloth is also in short supply.
This latest item, pulling apart a thread of hand twilled cloth and finding it separate into both cotton and linen, is interesting. Tell you a lot about how impoverished it was in the Middle Ages ~ lot of folks around knew how to do invisible reweaving to repair cloth. We, currently, are in short supply of such skilled folks. Almost a forgotten art. However, I'm old enough to remember dry cleaners with the sign "invisible reweaving" ~ but barely.
BTW, you can read this little discovery as two things ~ 1) as a repair, and 2) something done by someone willing to ignore ancient Jewish prohibitions on mixing two types of cloth.
That, at least, dates the repair to long after Jesus' day.
This is the book that changed my mind. Wilson takes a different tact on the search for evidence. He uses the detective method and traces the shroud through historical clues from Jerusalem to Constantinople where the Templars found it and brought it to Turin. New bio-tech finds are very interesting also. Pollens, etc. found only in the area of Jerusalem. As someone mentioned, the relic does not affect faith either way. Faith is faith and does not depend on anything but God’s Word. But isn’t it exciting to think that you are looking at the face and body of Jesus?
WILSON, Ian - The Blood and the Shroud: New Evidence that the World’s Most Sacred Relic is Real - Simon & Schuster New York 1998 (English) (Available from Amazon.com) In this book, Wilson presents new scientific evidence that challenges the 1988 carbon dating and other arguments against the authenticity of the Shroud. Current studies, presented here by Wilson, have reversed the views of many people in the scientific and religious communities.
For me, no scientific logistics are necessary; I say let’s start by agreeing that the thing is only 500 years old.
Now go back in time and find the greatest, photorealistic artist of that time ~ Michaelangelo for existance ~ compare the quality of his art and the probability that he could produce such an image (he could not). Then have him replicate the feat, but consider that it would need to be done in photp-reverse.
It seems unlikely to me that such an image could have been made 200 years ago.
“It is looking more and more like it is an authentic artifact from the time of Jesus death...”
It’s a cotton fake
It’s a linen fake that has been repaired
The author if this article is full of s**t
or... lots of other possibilities
There is no such thing. The goofballs who suggested it referred directly to "French Re-Weaving". I had a suit done in the 80's. It uses a matching peice of excess cloth from a hem that is then spliced in to match. In other words, if Benford and Marino were right, the patch would have had the same date as the original because it would have been original cloth.
The cloth that was actually c-14 tested was completely consumed in the process. These critics have NO basis for saying the sample was corrupted. (Here is a picture http://nvl.nist.gov/pub/nistpubs/jres/109/2/j92cur.pdf (go to page 17) of one of the samples. It is clearly the 3:1 herringbone twill of the rest of the shroud and no threads are missing. No patch is visible. The Vatican fabric experts there during the sampling certified it as original.)
Benford and Marino who came up with the invisible patch are absolute crackpots. See: http://www.gizapyramid.com/BIO-Benford-Marino.htm
The polen evidence by Frei was pure fraud. He was looking for fame. He also verified that the fake Hitler diaries were real and he is a laughing stock in handwriting analysis.
It isn't a Los Alamos team. It is a few old Catholics who happen to work at Los Alamos that were part of a group that analyzed the shroud in the 70's.
The statement that it is a photographic negative is false. The hair, eyebrows, and "blood" are not negative in the picture. It is a fake shroud, not a fake picture. It looks somewhat like a negative because the high points of the body that come into contact with a shroud are darker than those further away. A painting has closer features lighter. It isn't anatomically correct either. One arm is longer than the other and the hair forms a nice little cap and isn't flattened out. Also, the character on the shroud conveniently has his hands over his winkie as if anticipating that the "shroud" might be shown in church. This was common in medieval painting, but Jews were buried with their hands crossed on their chests.
I think there is some incorrect reporting in this article.
Raymond Rogers determined that the patch material was linen but it had cotton fibers inter-spun into the flax fibers which is not at all representative of threads taken from the main body of the Shroud. The presence of cotton IN the fibers is the anomaly.
The scientists accurately dated what they were given. They dated a sample that was taken in violation of the protocols that had been agreed ona sample that now turns out to be a melange of old and newer material, that when accurately dated, reports an average of the ages of the older and newer material which accidentally fell within the range the skeptics expected.
Bad sample in, bad data out.
The Turin cloth first appeared in north-central France in the mid-fourteenth century. At that time the local bishop uncovered an artist who confessed he had cunningly painted the image. Subsequently, in 1389, Pope Clement VII officially declared the shroud to be only a painted representation. For 500 years the shroud was considered a fake.
At the end of the 19th century, Secundo Pia took photos of the shroud. He noticed that the negatives appeared to be a positive image and that the shroud was therefore a negative image. The myth grew that the image was a miracle because it was a negative image that could not have been faked (because photographic negatives didnt exist in the Middle Ages) and that it is anatomically perfect. Both statements are wrong. The image isnt a true negative (hair, eyebrows, and blood are positive images, and the picture is far from anatomically perfect.) One arm is longer than the other. The hair is wrong. Blood trickles on the head are wrong and the overall figures height to girth is wrong.
In 1972 a team was put together by the Vatican. They used very sophisticated tests for blood, but found none. Two of the experts declared it a painting. They were pressured into saying they werent sure because of the miraculous negative properties and the alleged anatomical perfection.
During the later 70s, a group that venerated the Shroud assembled a team called the Shroud of Turin Research Project, STURP. Several of the scientists were from Los Alamos. None had experience in forensics or art forgeries, so they brought in the worlds foremost microscopist and noted forensic art expert, Walter McCrone. McCrone also found no blood and identified paint and substances typical of the art of the middle ages. He said it was a fake dated around 1355.
The STURP dudes flipped. They took away McCrones samples and tried to ruin him.
STURP used less sensitive tests for blood, and shazzam, they found it! Around the STURP team grew up a circle of quacks that found all kinds of miraculous things. The real scientists never did.
In 1988, the Vatican had samples taken by experts under their supervision. Three labs in three different countries c-14 tested the samples and came up with dates consistent with Pope Clement, and McCrone. The Catholic **** hit the fan.
A papal representative named Gonella had a hissy fit calling the scientists who did the tests dogs. He set out to prove them wrong by releasing samples without the Vaticans permission. Although there is no evidence except his word, he supposedly took a warp and weft thread from the samples that were used for dating (this was suspiciously convenient since the samples were destroyed in the testing). The sampling had been very closely scrutinized and no one confirms the existence of these threads and microphotographs of the samples do not show any missing threads. He did not have authority to distribute any samples.
A man named Rogers (of STURP who wasnt supposed to be involved) supposedly tested these threads and said that they came from an invisible patch. This was based on a report by Benford and Marino who are two of the quacks mentioned earlier (they are famous for being experts on spontaneous human combustion and pyramid power).
Rogers wrote a paper that slipped through the peer review process and appeared in a real scientific journal. The press seized on it as proof that the c-14 tests were flawed. They werent. Rogers paper was nonsense covered in pseudoscience. Interestingly, he stole from McCrone in it making claims he had ridiculed earlier.
The shroud is a fake. It was a known fake for 500 years. Every team that has tested it had members that said so. The STURP true believers have lied, stolen, and violated Vatican rules to keep the myth alive. They have been aided by UFO, Bigfoot type wackos who make a living at such things
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.