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 University’s 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 [1988] 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. LANL’s 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.
To those with a prosaic view of the world few things are worth money. To those who wonder about things particularly unusual and possibly miraculouws ones many things are worth speanding money on.
Re: Nickell
Nickell and his amateurs are NOT specialists in blood research as are Adler, Heller, and Cameron. His science advisor is a Geologist. Neither were the Italians. Your mere assertions do not make your claims true.
I am done with you.
bttt
I understand. You aren't up on the facts. Do what I did. Go back and read some of the more recent literature. It's tough playing whack-a-mole without the facts. Before you go, could you point me to this database you say exists?
In order for this shroud to be the burial cloth of Jesus (as many believe) it would have to be from that time period, place, and shown that the burial cloth was important enough to the people at the time to preserve it, and that the present day shroud is in fact that cloth and not an artist’s medieval work (as there is evidence for).
And then there is what one might call, “chain of evidence”.
So it could be just as easily be said that the C14 tests call into question the reliability of legend, stories, writings about this shroud.
It appears that the Turin Shroud is not a burial cloth of Jesus even if it’s origin is unknown
NO! Piero Savarino is the Scientific Adviser of the Papal Custodian of the Holy Shroud. Gonella was booted in 1989!
That would be pretty much YOU, Soliton.
Argue the facts dimbulb.
So keep typing, monkeyboy...
I never cared about an audience, that's why I don't add a hundred people to my replies. I care about the truth, not for you or poor swordmaker, but for me and my kids.
My thing is science. Global warmingists, creationists, shroudies are anti-science. I hate that, but I love a good debate.
If you want to debate me, try knowing more about your pet pseudo-science than I do. Swordmaker doesn't and neither do the hordes of creationists on FR.
I study, and yes, I try to be right. Pick a subject rookie, but don't call me monkeyboy.
Please! "I got to beat up on the Shroud of Turin - it's for the children."
My thing is science.
*shrug* I have a degree in science. Big deal.
Before trying to smear me as a "creationist" or pseudo-scientist, get your facts right.
I didn't say a thing about the Shroud.
I was talking about your debate style.
Observations:
#1 - Anything you type is apparently "right" by default, due to your "superior intellect".
#2 - Anyone that contradicts you is "wrong" - because you say so, and are willing to type so until your fingers fall off.
So, anyone reading your trash needn't bother, but should just refer to points #1 & #2. It'll save them time and bother.
BTW - a real scientific viewpoint of the Shroud would be "undetermined" - not enough data. All the gyrations of the Shroud Derangement Syndrome types and the shroudies are interesting, but the conclusion must be held in abeyance.
This is another reason why your posts are useless - you've already arrived at your pre-determined conclusion.
I ain't buying what you're selling, n00b.
“So, anyone reading your trash needn’t bother, but should just refer to points #1 & #2. It’ll save them time and bother....”
I wish I had taken your advice long ago, it probably would have saved me some aggravation.
Regards,
Scott
P.S. You have freepmail
my facts are facts regardless of my opinion. The FR "expert" on the shroud didn't know the facts. I'm sorry you don't like my style, but try to pay attention to SUBSTANCE
If this flamewar doesn’t end NOW this thread will be locked.
Grow up.
Your "facts" are no different than the "facts" of the Democrats and the Main Stream Media.
You'll trumpet the "facts" that support your opinion, and suppress or attack the facts that undermine your position.
I learned long ago what that kind of skunk smells like, and it ain't a way to arrive at the truth of a matter.
Again, another reason why your posts are useless at arriving at the truth.
Thanks. I’ll cease battle.
Thanks.
Have felt it may well be authentic, for a long time.
It sounds to me like the Shroud leaves more questions than answers.
It’s cool, but I have a couple of questions.
I think the man portrayed looks more European than Middle Eastern.
Also, I got the impression Jesus’ burial cloths were wrapped around the body or wound around him, almost like a mummy, and the whole thing would have been heavily coated with myrrh and aloes. (John 19: 39-42)
I always wondered if a Crusader were crucified for some reason and the cloth had something to do with him.
Lots of things are plausible.
The winding could have been on top of the current Shroud.
Eternity alone, likely, will tell.
Thx
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.