Red flag.
Posted on 03/30/2002 8:54:56 PM PST by Swordmaker
Abstract: In 1988, Carbon-14 findings from three Accelerator Mass Spectrometer (AMS) Labs independently dated a sample removed from the Shroud of Turin: unarguably the most widely studied linen cloth in history. The dates reported ranged between 1260 -1390 A.D.; thus, leading to the conclusion that the cloth originated in the middle ages. This paper, previously presented on August 28, 2000 at the Worldwide Congress "Sindone 2000" in Orvieto, Italy, presents evidence that the sample tested by the three AMS labs contained a "patch" of material from the 16th Century(!). The authors examine the theory that this extraneous material was skillfully spliced into the 1st Century original Shroud cloth in the C-14 sample used by the laboratories for testing. According to hypothetical calculations performed by AMS laboratory, Beta Analytic, the world's largest radiocarbon dating service, the observed proportion of medieval material in relationship to assumed 1st Century material, closely matches the findings of the AMS Labs in 1988.
It is well known and documented that the Shroud has been repaired several times in its history, including in the area from which the C-14 sample was taken. The most recent was in 1973 after Professor Gilbert Raes, a member of the Turin Commission that studied the Shroud in 1969 and 1973, was given some samples. But is it possible that other undocumented repairs were made to the Shroud? Enzo Delorenzi, also a member of the Turin Commission, made the very significant statement:
"…I should like to mention the impression I received during the course of my examination, namely, that more pairs of hands have carried out the darning than is suggested in the historical records (the four Clarissas of Chambery, the Blessed Valfre and the Princess Clotilde). "(Delorenzi 1976, pg. 111)
In light of the compelling evidence that we are about to present, we believe that the theory that the Shroud has literally been patched with medieval material from the 16 th century, in the C-14 sample itself, explains the medieval carbon dating results. Furthermore, several other sindonologists have identified various anomalies that also seem to point to undocumented repairs (Gervasio, 1986: 264, 268), which adds credence to the hypothesis that the C-14 sample area may have been similarly enhanced.
Giovanni Riggi, the person who actually cut the C-14 sample, which was from the same area from which the 1973 “Raes piece” was taken, stated:
"I was authorized to cut approximately 8 square centimetres of cloth from the Shroud…This was then reduced to about 7 cm because fibres of other origins had become mixed up with the original fabric …"(Riggi 1988:182).
Italian author Giorgio Tessiore, discussing the sample taking, noted, “…1 cm of the new sample had to be discarded because of the presence of different color threads” (Tessiore, 1988:44).
Upon microscopic examination of the Oxford C-14 sample, Professor Edward Hall, head of the Oxford lab, noticed fibers that looked out of place. A laboratory in Derbyshire determined that the rogue fibers were cotton of “a fine, dark yellow strand.” According to Peter South of the lab, “It may have been used for repairs at some time in the past…” (Rogue Fibres found in the Shroud, 1988:13).
Professor Raes, who extracted the above cited Shroud sample in 1973, believes that in the 1988 Oxford sample he examined, the cotton he observed was contained inside the threads, which could help to explain the difference in fiber diameter (Raes, 1989). We believe that the heavier, blended material may explain why the C-14 sample apparently weighed about twice as much as expected (Petrosillo and Marinelli, 1996:63).
However, one also needs to find chemical differences to support the theory of a medieval patch. The late Dr. Alan Adler, a chemist and member of the STURP team that studied the Shroud in 1978, noted:
"So you can talk all you want about how reproducible the date is, but you can’t talk about how accurate it is. You have no way of knowing if the area you took the C14 sample from represents the whole cloth. That’s an area which has obviously been repaired. There’s cloth missing there. It’s been rewoven on the edge. They even cut part of it off, because it was obviously rewoven on the edge. The simplest explanation why the date may be off is that it’s rewoven cloth there. And that’s not been tested." (Case, 1996:73).
When you look at the actual photographs of the shroud samples you can literally SEE the difference in weave between the original cloth and the patch!
This downloads the actual paper presented in PDF format... you will need Acrobat Reader to see the graphs and photos.
Red flag.
Not only does "carbon" from such a fire skew C-14 testing, the cloth was mended from where it was burned.
The church, in not wanting important parts of the Shroud taken, may have given material from the "patch" area that was done to the Shroud because of the fire.
www.shroud.org
and
www.shroud.com
have much more scientific and other information on this.
Additionally, there is a documentary VHS available on the Shroud (more religious than scientific, but containing many scientific aspects).
It is:
Mystery of the Sacred Shroud and it is narrated by Richard Burton (sigh!). ISBN 1-55739-283-8. This was done in 1992.
If you had read the article, you would have been aware that the percentages used were based on observation of the proportional physical differences between cloth that is spun in one direction (an "S" direction) and cloth that is obviously spun in another( a "Z" direction) that is quite apparent on the photographs of the samples.
The hypothetical comes of necessity from estimating the amount of the differing material that was sent to each of the AMS laboratories. These figures were then supplied to the labs and the "hypothetical" question was asked as to how these proportions of 16th Century linen and 1st Century linen would skew the resultant data.
Note that this article was published in a peer reviewed periodical and presented to an international symposium of other scientists.
Why does it matter? Will your faith be increased or decreased over the shroud? Do you need evidence that Christ was born, persecuted, and died on the Cross?
Just think what this could mean to those who do not believe and the future of humanity.
Luke 16, 19:31
So, what good will a piece of cloth be?
You give a good illustration. I believe it would greatly enhance spreading the Gospel to Islam and the Far East. It would be everlasting to many (not all) to prove that Jesus rose from the dead scientifically. That's why opponents are trying to discredit.
Well, as long as we're talking scientifically - how would it prove that Christ rose from the dead? How does the shroud provide that evidence?
I accept that Christ rose from the dead after three days in the tomb. I accept that on faith. I don't need a receipt.
I think the Shroud can definately help unbelievers. It helped me, for instance.
Back when I started to investigate the claims of the major religions (this was just after I had rejected atheism) I proceeded in a scientific manner, examining evidence rather than going on faith. I did this because I was used to this method when I had accepted the nonexistence of God.
Having been born and nominally raised Catholic, I did have a familiarity with Christ's teachings and life, however with the knowledge I had I was not prepared to believe in any manner whatsoever.
That's when I stumbled across ShroudForum, a web site concerned with examining the Shroud. What I found was astounding. Evidence about the quite probable problems with Carbon-14 testing, the Sudarium, the general consensus with the scientific community that there is no natural causes that could have created the image, etc.
What was most shocking to me was this:
Speculation on how the image was formed is focused in theoretical physics models which for many implies (comfortably or uncomfortably) resurrection. For example, as Kevin Moran writes:
It is suggested that the image was formed when a high-energy particle struck the fiber and released radiation within the fiber at a speed greater that the local speed of light. Since the fiber acts as a light pipe, this energy moved out through the fiber until it encountered an optical discontinuity, then it slowed to the local speed of light and dispersed.
The fact that the pixels don’t fluoresce suggests that the conversion to their now brittle dehydrated state occurred instantly and completely so no partial products remain to be activated by the ultraviolet light. This suggests a quantum event where a finite amount of energy transferred abruptly.
The fact that there are images front and back suggests the radiating particles were released along the gravity vector.
The radiation pressure may also help explain why the blood was "lifted cleanly" from the body as it transformed to a resurrected state.
Now, I didn't wholeheartedly believe this scientific explanation (nor do I now, as it is just a theory) but it hit me so hard that I had to learn more about the historical evidence for Christ. This search led me to a variety of wonderful resources, and a long story short, I have reverted to the Church.
The shroud itself proves nothing of who was wrapped in it... but it suggests much. Just as the Gospels prove nothing and are flawed by the very flaw that calls into question any eyewitness testimony... they are not the actual events! The Gospels are the recollections and anecdotes of many who claimed to have witnessed the things to which they are attesting... and as such they are incomplete, replete with frustrating disparities, contradictions and all. They do however SUGGEST something very extraordinary occurred in a backwater area of the Roman Empire 2000 years or so ago.
The shroud also suggests that something very extraordinary occurred to the person which it enwrapped; a person who apparently suffered the exact same mistreatment as did the Jesus of Nazareth of those Gospel stories. As such it stands as a Fifth Gospel... equally as questionable (and frustrating) as the first and second century second and third hand oral rememberances written down as the first Four.
There are many pieces of ancient cloth still extant today... and many of them encased dead bodies. NONE of them preserve an image of the person they enclosed except this one unique cloth that is associated with what to all reports enshrouded a unique person of extreme importance to one of the major religions of the world.
Does it enhance my faith? No more so than the Four Gospels and the letters and acts of the apostles who's authors I cannot cross examine nor look in their eyes to judge the truth of their assertions. The Shroud differs however in that it provides a possible witness that CAN be tested and cross examined (pun somewhat intended!). And except for this one scientific test, the Carbon-14 test, which challenges the authenticity of the shroud, the shroud testifies very well. Many of its "statements" about the time and customs of both Rome and Judea have been verified by independent investigation and examination of other similar "witness." Its inexplicable image cannot be duplicated in all of its details and nature even with today's technology... a challenge with an almost "Thumb in your eye" dare to those who are convinced it is a fraud.
Since the only physical evidence we have is the shroud itself, the carbon-14 test is particularly damning and seems to impeach the testimony of the shroud. As the only convincing testimony impeaching the shroud IS the carbon-14 test results it behooves us to assure that test is, itself, unimpeachable. It is not. In fact, the photographs and hypothesis presented in the above paper, by an expert witness, has most likely successfully impeached the impeachment witness against the Shroud and we have been returned to the state of uncertainty that existed before the test was done, only now we have more knowledge and more direction for our research.
It is a shame you are not open-minded. If you were, you would find out that many of the original scientific team was converted by working on the investigation of the Shroud.
If you claim this fraud, how can you explain that the shroud was made from "energy", according to the NASA/US Air Force test. Even more amazing is the fact that when NASA ran a series of tests, they found the Shroud was a 3-d image, not a 2-d.
Finally, from this testing, it was found that the eyes of the person buried had Pontius Pilate coins over the eyes of the man.
Other tests revealed pollen in the fabric of the cloth. This pollen was only found in Israel 2000 years ago, and is now exinct (the flowers).
But if you are to make the bold claim TO SIDE WITH THE IGNORANT AND BIASED MEDIA ABOUT THE SHROUD, then at least go to "www.shroud.com" and read some of the articles before believing the media (gobbling their garbage down, hook, line and sinker).
There is no excuse for someone to make claims if they have not even attempted to research the topic.
Finally, the Shroud was burned in a fire. FIRE EMITS CARBON, so this would skew the Carbon-14 dating. Additionally, because of the damage of the fire, the shroud was mended with NEW CLOTH. The mended area was probably given for the Carbon-14 dating.
Finally, there have been some very brilliant scientists come out and say how "flawed" the original carbon-14 dating is.
But then ignorance is bliss, so maybe you want to have bliss and stay ignorant of the facts.
If the Shroud is a fraud, there are many different scientific studies that would have to be refuted, including the very high tech one done by NASA and the US Air Force.
If it is a fraud, then how can you explain this being made from energy (my theory is that it is the energy of resurrection).
I am waiting for some sort of intelligent response.
Good point. However, many of the scientific team was converted from the original work on the Shroud. Some of this information is from www.shroud.com You might want to visit the page to learn of some of the conversion stories...
Only one problem with that -- do not give what is holy to dogs
Pagans will not be allowed to defile a holy object.
The original scientific testing was restricted so as not to "defile" the object.
If you are too lazy to go to www.shroud.com to find out some of the interesting findings and how some of the original team was converted, there is no point in using the "flawed" science of today to measure something that is "perfect and holy".
Science is truly the "armpit" and "degenerates" of civilization today. For examples, in our Univerisities, it is considered to be "great intellictual" thought that babies should be allowed to be killed after they are born. This comes out of places like MIT because they do not recognize babies as life for THEIR REASONS.
Maybe the real question is why should we listen to science at all when many people are being miraculuous cured around the world.
The first cure of AIDS occured to a dying AIDS patient in Africa. Prayers were offered to the intercession of God, and that was granted.
SCIENCE SUCKS DUCK WATER.
I'd explain this by saying you have no idea what you are talking about. We'll leave aside matter-energy equivalence, since I doubt that is what you are breathlessly referring to.
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.