Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Turin Shroud 'could be genuine as carbon-dating was flawed' (Dying Scientist Reverses Self)
UK Daily Telegraph ^ | 10 Apr 2009 | Stephen Adams

Posted on 04/10/2009 4:24:42 PM PDT by GOPGuide

New evidence suggests the Turin Shroud could have been the cloth in which Jesus was buried, as experiments that concluded it was a medieval fake were flawed.

Radio carbon dating carried out in 1988 was performed on an area of the relic that was repaired in the 16th century, according to Ray Rogers, who helped lead the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STRP).

At the time he argued firmly that the shroud, which bears a Christlike image, was a clever forgery.

snip

"Sue and Joe were right. The worst possible sample for carbon dating was taken.

"It consisted of different materials than were used in the shroud itself, so the age we produced was inaccurate."

In the video, made shortly before he died of cancer in March 2005, he said: "I came very close to proving the shroud was used to bury the historic Jesus."

This latest evidence, to be broadcast in The Turin Shroud: New Evidence at 8pm on Sunday on the Discovery Channel, is the latest chapter in the shroud's history.

For the last 21 years most have considered it to be a medieval fake, after the 1988 tests dated it as being made between 1260 and 1390.

The result overturned 10 years of hope among Christians that it was real, after the first scientific tests found evidence of blood and serum stains.

The earliest documented sighting of the shroud is from 1353, but last week a historian claimed in the Vatican's newspaper that she had found a "missing link" in the Holy See's Secret Archives proving the Knights Templar had safeguarded it during the 13th century.

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: faithneedsnoproof; godsgravesglyphs; jesus; medievalfake; noprovenance; notafake; shroud; shroudofturin; turin

1 posted on 04/10/2009 4:24:43 PM PDT by GOPGuide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

Happy Easter!


2 posted on 04/10/2009 4:25:09 PM PDT by GOPGuide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide
Happy Easter to you too!

If this is the show I watched last weekend, it is well worth the time. Two other scientists, can't remember the names, discovered that the carbon dating pieces came from a part of the shroud that had been repaired between 1200 and 1600. The woman, who said she was clueless about the shroud until she saw some pictures of it on TV made the discovery AND HAS PROVEN IT. Rogers called BS on their paper about the repair and started his own investigation. Before he died, he said, I'll be damned, they're right.

I'll probably catch it again. It was very well done.

3 posted on 04/10/2009 4:33:10 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (So Orwell was off by 25 years! So what!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
Before he died, he said, I'll be damned, they're right.

Not exactly the type of thing one wants to say on their deathbed, although it might constitute repentance.

4 posted on 04/10/2009 4:42:18 PM PDT by Carry_Okie (It's time to waterboard that teleprompter and find out what it knows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Ping


5 posted on 04/10/2009 4:55:42 PM PDT by BuckeyeTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

Looks like the liberals are having a tough time trying taking over Easter this year.


6 posted on 04/10/2009 5:04:36 PM PDT by mtg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

If the Shroud is fake, it is really, really good fake. An almost unbelievably good fake considering the technology of the era. I am not a Christian but I do have an open mind about this.


7 posted on 04/10/2009 5:06:08 PM PDT by Jeff Gordon (I don't trust Obama with my country. Do you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·

 
Gods
Graves
Glyphs
Thanks BuckeyeTexan.

Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution.

To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
 

·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society ·
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·


8 posted on 04/10/2009 5:08:28 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/____________________ Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

HAPPY EASTER... PRAISE GOD!

LLS


9 posted on 04/10/2009 5:08:38 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (hussein will NEVER be my President... NEVER!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

bookmark.


10 posted on 04/10/2009 5:11:34 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GodGunsGuts

Ping.


11 posted on 04/10/2009 5:13:41 PM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

Virtually all carbon-dating is flawed. It works fine if you have a closed system, but most pld stuff has been subject to distortions


12 posted on 04/10/2009 5:14:47 PM PDT by cookcounty (Obama's got Bush's inheritance .......and now he wants your kids'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
In the end the radiocarbon dating exercise demonstrated that the stories about the Medieval repair job were absolutely correct.

That provides evidence for the presumed chain of custody.

Eventually something other than a chunk of the repair will be tested.

13 posted on 04/10/2009 5:18:21 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I think they said that the burns were repaired in 2003. The scientists are asking for those pieces that were removed during those repairs since they came from the interior of the shroud instead of the edges. I’d love to see that happen.


14 posted on 04/10/2009 5:23:46 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (So Orwell was off by 25 years! So what!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

“Virtually all carbon-dating is flawed. It works fine if you have a closed system, but most pld stuff has been subject to distortions”

Uh-oh. You are about to be descended upon by rabid evolutionists who proclaim that Carbon-14 dating is sacred and not subject to flaws.


15 posted on 04/10/2009 6:01:32 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

I recently watched a television show on this scientist. It would certainly appear the shroud is back in play.


16 posted on 04/10/2009 6:04:41 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: webstersII

DNA testing to prove or disprove crime is another modern article of faith, with similarly fanatical believers in its absolute reliability.


17 posted on 04/10/2009 6:09:27 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide
At the time he argued firmly that the shroud, which bears a Christlike image, was a clever forgery.

That was the same time the Pope announced he had converted to Islam

18 posted on 04/10/2009 6:16:21 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Obama decision of the week. To order in Pizza)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

It would seem if you take the bible literally then the carbon dating is irrelevant. If you accept carbon dating for the shroud, you kinda have to accept carbon dating that shows the earth is much older than 6,000 years.


19 posted on 04/10/2009 6:28:05 PM PDT by yazoo (was)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yazoo
If you accept carbon dating for the shroud, you kinda have to accept carbon dating that shows the earth is much older than 6,000 years.

Or not. Using it to refute the age of an artifact is entirely different from using it to affirm the age of an artifact.

Carbon dating has numerous problems and so does radiometric dating. When an Hawaiian lava flow, known to have occurred in 1801, was tested, twelve times, twelve different results were reached, all varying wildly, none accurate, ranging from 140 million years to nearly 4 billion years, with an average between the twelve of 1.46 billion years. It was less than 200 years old at the time.

20 posted on 04/10/2009 6:35:14 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

God doesn’t need special effects.


21 posted on 04/10/2009 6:37:56 PM PDT by HospiceNurse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

btt


22 posted on 04/10/2009 6:41:49 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat ( Islamia Delenda Est ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

Wow. If I remember correctly, Rogers was a pretty hard-core shroud skeptic.


23 posted on 04/10/2009 6:43:43 PM PDT by Antoninus (Now accepting apologies from repentant Mittens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

The shroud is conclusively not a painted image and has properties that could not have been known in Medieval times. So if it is a Medieval fake how was it made?


24 posted on 04/10/2009 7:01:28 PM PDT by The Great RJ (chain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; betty boop
*PING*, ladies, to post 4 this thread. LOL!

...and Happy Good Friday.

...countdown to Guinness and chocolate has BEGUN.

Cheers!

25 posted on 04/10/2009 7:10:48 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Ask them about integrity of the sample.

Either extraneous contamination, or "chain-of-custody" will do.

And the Shroud has neither one -- it was around for hundreds of years before anyone radiocarbon tested it.

Cheers!

...and Happy Good Friday.

26 posted on 04/10/2009 7:12:51 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: yazoo
If you accept carbon dating for the shroud, you kinda have to accept carbon dating that shows the earth is much older than 6,000 years.

Not necessarily -- God or the Devil could've fudged the data in the latter case.

But people don't like to open that can of worms for a whole variety of reasons.

Cheers!

...oh, and Happy Easter.

27 posted on 04/10/2009 7:14:16 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

It really doesn’t matter to me whether or not the shroud is a fake - I believe Jesus Christ died and rose again. A burial cloth is irrelevant to my faith.

Happy Easter, everyone!


28 posted on 04/10/2009 7:20:19 PM PDT by reagan_fanatic (We've gone from Jefferson to the Jeffersons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

Thanks for the ping! And a Happy Good Friday to you!


29 posted on 04/10/2009 9:06:22 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
Carbon dating has numerous problems and so does radiometric dating. When an Hawaiian lava flow, known to have occurred in 1801, was tested, twelve times, twelve different results were reached, all varying wildly, none accurate, ranging from 140 million years to nearly 4 billion years, with an average between the twelve of 1.46 billion years. It was less than 200 years old at the time.

Rock is not carbon dated. C14 has a half life of about 6000 years; radioisotope dating is mostly accurate within the first 6 or so half lifes (~36,000 years for C14). Also, you have to remember, that even if the volcano erupted 200 years ago, the rock that emerged is as old as the earth.

30 posted on 04/10/2009 9:31:46 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Wow. If I remember correctly, Rogers was a pretty hard-core shroud skeptic.

Yes, he was, but he was also a real scientist, who was willing to look at the evidence, and the data, and open his mind to a different conclusion than the one he'd drawn from the 1988 test results.

We saw this show last year, and it was excellent!

31 posted on 04/10/2009 10:31:17 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: GOPGuide

the question is, does it matter if it was a medievel fake or two thousand years old, who is to say that it really is the visage of christ?


32 posted on 04/10/2009 10:50:20 PM PDT by Nipplemancer (Abolish the DEA !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: exDemMom

As old as the earth? Why stop there? We’re talking formerly molten lava, here. I though argon was supposed to be the problem, making it look “too old.”


33 posted on 04/10/2009 10:55:57 PM PDT by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; albee; AnalogReigns; AnAmericanMother; Angelas; AniGrrl; annalex; annyokie; ...
Another report on the Discovery Channel documentary on Ray Rogers findings about the 1988 C14 tests... this one from the UK. PING!

If you want on or off the Shroud of Turin Ping List, Freepmail me.


34 posted on 04/10/2009 11:09:00 PM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thx!


35 posted on 04/10/2009 11:12:42 PM PDT by JoeProBono (A closed mouth gathers no feet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Wow. If I remember correctly, Rogers was a pretty hard-core shroud skeptic.

You are not remembering correctly. Raymond N. Rogers was a member of STURP and a real scientist. What he stated was that when the C14 tests reported ages of 1260-1390, he accepted the findings. He was not hard core as a skeptic and many of the discoveries about the chemistry on the Shroud are his. He was a stickler when it came to the various theories about WHY the C14 tests were wrong (as was I) and would vigorously point out the failings in critiques of the various theories propounded.

He THOUGHT he would be able to experimentally prove that the two scholars, Susan Benford and Joseph Marino, non-scientists, were wrong about their theory of a medieval invisible patch in the sampled area. His tests proved just the opposite of what he thought he would prove. He proved that although the main body of the Shroud is made of Linen from the Flax plant, the area tested was a mixture of original Linen and COTTON dyed to match the original cloth.

36 posted on 04/10/2009 11:18:29 PM PDT by Swordmaker (Remember, the proper pronunciation of IE is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

“Ask them about integrity of the sample.”

Agreed. Belief in the Shroud as the burial shroud of Jesus is just that — belief.

But so is evolution, because it has all the same problems you mentioned.


37 posted on 04/11/2009 6:06:28 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
You seem to have misunderstood.

By "integrity of the sample" I was referring to contamination of the Shroud during the many years before it was available for radiocarbon dating; and various incidents during its lifetime, such as its being boiled in oil (IIRC) by folks hundreds of years ago to try to remove the image.

Such things do not make for good forensics -- the oil may have removed some of the Jerusalem area pollens, making the evidentiary nature of the pollen's presence easier to challenge by those with an agenda.

Cheers!

38 posted on 04/11/2009 6:29:49 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thank you ping. It just takes time, the more we learn the more real is the Shroud.


39 posted on 04/11/2009 7:47:58 AM PDT by ex-snook ( "Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480; NYer; narses

.


40 posted on 04/11/2009 12:18:28 PM PDT by Coleus (Abortion, Euthanasia & FOCA - - don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swordmaker

Thanks for the ping!


41 posted on 04/11/2009 10:10:48 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Charles Henrickson

Okay, the Shroud of Turin is back in the news. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if there is a book and movie about this (hopefully better than the DaVinci Code which was boring). What’s your take on the Shroud?


42 posted on 04/13/2009 5:27:57 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (E.J. Dionne: "Make the World Safe for Tax Increases")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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