Shroud of turin carbon dating 2015

I am not sure anyone or thing was behind Chagas except arrogance and touch of anti Americanism. The man is dead.

Turin Shroud may have been created by earthquake from time of Jesus

On the other hand, the carbon dating of the Shroud was the beginning of billion dollar enterprise because the labs wanted a test case to show what they can do. STURP was on its own. Money flows to power and power flows to money. You also bandied around suggestions that my research was heading towards a dead end through failure to factor in a supernatural event understandably omitting to state how that could be tested, apart from an appreciative word for Paolo and his laser beams. If you want to see progress — real progress — with no dead ends in sight, not yet at any rate, I suggest you check out the latest posting on my site.

Referencing your effort, obviously, only the top fibrils of the linen were scorched colored , since you repeated the process on the back of the cloth? The use of convoluted prose is a feature common to the Holy See and this is not just incidental as you wrongly imply.


  1. Total Pageviews.
  2. .
  3. Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin.
  4. marriage without dating online streaming.

You should immediately inform the Radiocarbon experts who dated the old cloth about this. Lab archaeology is one thing. BOTH are needed in determination of reliable dates. In , lab archaeology ONLY prevailed at the expense of a multidisciplinary approach. Mordant is known to be used for intensifying stains e. Now it is well known gelatine is a breakdown product of collagen. It has nothing to do with a supernatural event. By replacing my myrrhic? How many postings on your own site? Or are we supposed to access your canon here how do we do that Dan?

My latest model evolves as we speak. Nuff said for now methinks. The immediate problem is not a dead end thanks, JoeM but deciding upon which of numerous directions to proceed. I also need a break 2 months of non-stop experimentation. Have they not heard of Geber and his extensive writings, including a recipe for generating what we would now call nitric acid fumes beware: BTW how come you can totally rule out the possibility for the linen cloth to be genuine? Are you just aware the removal of such contaminants is either impossible or almost impossible?

Were you a REAL scientist and not an agenda-driven scientist alike Hall et al from sad memory , your motto should be: This is getting somewhat tedious Max. Last June, I was toying with the idea that quicklime, more specifically its heat of reaction with water — might have been used to produce a thermal image. The grounds were tenuous to say the least. Quicklime forms an alkali with water calcium hydroxide which was incidental in my model. But I never implicated either limestone nor ammonia, and in any case dropped the quicklime idea in short order, finding experimentally there was insufficient heat to raise a template to scorching temperature.

You on the other hand do not experiment, so consequently your ideas do not evolve. You continue to incant the same 1st century tomb scenario month after month, year after year, and continually scan my new thinking for evidence of plagiarism. I am flattered that you dropped all your previous ideas and should want to finally take into account my fumigation theory as the most likely while recycling it to meet your anti-authenticist agenda. What you fail to take on board is it took me nearly 30 years to really think my fumigation theory does hold water.

There I was thinking the art of delivering an honest-to-goodness diatribe was dead, and you immediately go and excel yourself. As for me, I have to be content with finding more mundane ways of filling my day, like turning out more images using my, sorry, your new nitric acid fumigation technique. One can imprint off a real person or statue, bas relief etc. The imprinting medium flour paste etc is non-injurious to skin. One can mould the linen to contours manually if desired, capturing as much or as little of the 3D relief as one wishes with more or less risk of lateral distortion.

Development of the image in the fumigation chamber can be monitored visually at intervals over minutes or hours until one has obtained optimum image intensity, and the least damage to linen fibres. Retained acid fumes after development can be neutralized, either with lime water, or by dry dusting with powdered chalk. However, some weakening of fibres must be expected. The technique allows for blood or blood substitute to be applied at the same time as body-imprinting medium, provided the blood or substitute stays red in nitric acid fumes real blood does not — it quickly turns a brown colour.

Blood would have been applied after. When applied to new linen, the technique has a side-effect that would be seen as a bonus — artificial ageing of the linen. Centuries later, pro-authenticity chemists and others would be delighted to find there was less potential vanillin and more mechanical weakness than would be expected of medieval linen a mere years old.

Chemical action of limited duration may result in more superficial change to linen fibres than is possible by thermal scorching, such that one sees no colouring at the interface of the SCW and central lumen. Reverse-side coloration can be minimized by suitable adaption of technique thick linen, use of sizes to block up pores, use of viscous imprinting media etc.

As properly noted, all this is simply an hypothesis at this stage, one that will need a lot of experimental work to evaluate, with the possibility of premature paradigm death at any stage. However, I shall be taking a break from experimental work for at least a fortnight probably longer, these last few weeks having been fairly hectic, spent in and out of the garage, trying to avoid or escape acid spillage and acid fumes, first with the H2SO4, and now with HNO3 Phase 1 complete. This should explain point 1 and the lack of color in the SCW. Now, looking at your preliminary experiments http: Your hand image has sharp contours and consists of brown contact stains with many white no contact stains within it.

This is not at all what we see on the Shroud. The latter is then converted to the image that existed on the TS when first produced the nature of which we can only guess at. That second stage is probably one of chemical OR thermal development the latter as per Garlaschelli. After sleeping on that list of 10 points, all I would add for now is a gift wrapper in dubious good taste thinking of the sensibilities that prevail generally on this site, with one or two notable exceptions.

It was intended to be a bigger and better whole-body, front and back negative imprint NOT painting that would trump the Veil of Veronica, then the major draw for medieval pilgrims according to Neil McGregor, recently retired Director of the British Museum. No, they did not scorch the body image with a heated template, not if the aim was to simulate an ancient sweat imprint.

They consulted an alchemist, possibly one with a sympathetic religious disposition Paul of Taranto, the Franciscan monk? He in turn delivered state-of-the-art proto-chemical technology, in the form of nitric acid fumes, guaranteed to turn virtually any organic material into a yellow or brown stain on linen. Sure, it weakens the linen itself, but then the fibres on the TS ARE weaker than expected for something that is only years old according to the radiocarbon dating objections noted.

In short, the ends justified the means. A similar hard-headed philosophy appears to prevail to this day viz. Just guess what will happen? Here are several key paragraphs:. The announcement by Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro cast doubt on earlier test results indicating the shroud was only about years old.

John’s Tip Jar

It clearly states that the Vatican does not accept that the C results prove the Shroud to be a forgery. Some may feel that the C results do prove the Shroud to be a forgery, which justifies narrowing image-formation theories to medieval origins, but I believe this statement alone is grounds for disputing that stance. But Oxford is heavily supported by the British S. National Science Foundation ; one will be very surprised if shroud dating is not prominently mentioned in heir next round of grant applications.

Thanks for the information, Joe. The problem is that is still does not answer the question about why Professor Carlos Chagas acted in the way described by John. I do not think it is anti-Americanism, although I have observed that many people in Third World countries tend to be ambivalent when it comes to Americans. They admire their progress, but wanting to be like them, and unable to do so, they become jealous.

Turin Shroud may date from time of Jesus - Telegraph

There is a clue when it comes to who was working behind the scenes, however a little more information is needed to fill a gap. He may have personal opinions — as Nabber quotes above — and he may pronounce in his position as head of the Church, which he also does: Hugh, you are trying to couch it in the terms you prefer, but that is a false reading. It speaks to spiritual matters, and the Pope is the head of all spiritual matters for RCs, speaking ex-cathedra or not.

The best that anyone could say about the 2 statements is that the Pope was conflicted, but he indeed spoke on matters of faith both times. I think he would have been right at home participating on this blog…. Pope Francis is No.

Navigation menu

I am convinced that the shroud is not at all related to the one from Jesus because of what the scriptures say. In Isaiah, we find that the beard of Jesus was plucked out the shroud shows a beard , and that he was marred more than any man. To be marred more than any other man would have be extremely brutal. I believe that this is saying that Jesus was totally disfigured from appearing human. To be marred more than any other man would leave Him completely unrecognizable. This is probably why the disciples did not recognize Him on road to Emmaus.

The versus below confirm this. I hid not my face from shame and spitting. Thus there was no need for any further testing. However, the carbon date testing simply verifies that the Shroud is not from the time of Jesus, and thus the data should be believed. Who told you that scriptures are telling the absolute truth.

Scripyures tell some truth. Jesus asked you to read things with open eyes and open mind. As such they cannot be New Testament history but the verses are part of an oracle.


  • The Shroud of Turin: Favs: New Tests Date the Shroud from the Time of Christ.
  • Carbon Date the Shroud Again?.
  • madrid gay dating.
  • Turin Shroud: the latest evidence will challenge the sceptics.
  • As such they require a particular understanding and careful interpretation. They are commonly included in the Good Friday liturgy readings because of their aptness to the sufferings of Christ. It may have been in the hoped-for rise of a prophetic figure that would release the people from their exile and enable them to return to their home-land. Many scholars now hold that the suffering servant is Israel in a collective sense. Christians see them as a prophecy of the sufferings of Christ. However to read them as a specific detailed historical literal description of the visage of Jesus of Nazareth some half-a-millenium after they were written is a step too far.

    In the case of the apostle Thomas needing to see the nail-holes and the wound in the side, the explanation is more simple. He was not present when Jesus appeared to the others, and it as an expression of his incredulity that Jesus had risen and appeared to them. When Jesus does appear to them again when Thomas is present, Thomas acknowledges him immediately.

    Bernard says he is convinced that the Shroud is not related to Jesus because of what the scriptures say. Bernard should investigate and learn what is known about the Shroud. It is just possible he may be persuaded to change his opinion. Examine the Shroud of Turin interactively. Russ Breault explains his take on the Shroud of Turin.

    The Shroud of Turin may be the real burial cloth of Jesus. The carbon dating, once seemingly proving it was a medieval fake, is now widely thought of as suspect and meaningless. Even the famous Atheist Richard Dawkins admits it is controversial. Christopher Ramsey, the director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory, thinks more testing is needed. So do many other scientists and archeologists. This is because there are significant scientific and non-religious reasons to doubt the validity of the tests.

    The shroud was indeed damaged by fire and patched up in , but those patches, called the Holland cloth, are obvious. But he now says that there is something in it. Luigi Gonella, the Archbishop of Turin's scientific adviser, provided Rogers with a few threads from the piece cut for dating, which he compared with the samples he collected during the Shroud of Turin Research Project. The radiocarbon sample, but not other parts of the shroud, seems to have been dyed with madder, a colorant not widely used in Europe until after the Crusades, Rogers writes in Thermochimica Acta [Vol.

    This suggested that the fabric could have been inserted during repair, after being dyed to match the original, older cloth. Perhaps more compelling is that most of the shroud lacks vanillin, a breakdown product of the lignin in cotton fibres. There is vanillin in the Holland cloth, and in other medieval linen.

    Because it decomposes over time, this suggests that the main body of the cloth is considerably older than these patches. By calculating the rate of decay, Rogers arrives at his revised estimate of the shroud's age.

    Carbon dating and the Shroud of Turin

    AD " radiocarbon date. So we are back to the situation before the radiocarbon dating of , when, as Classics Professor Robert Drews who did not then, and presumably does not now, think the Shroud was authentic , wrote in We must therefore conclude that, if the Shroud is indeed ancient, as it seems to be, it is very likely that the image on the Shroud is that of Jesus' body. Should a carbon test [or any other scientific dating test, let alone four -my interpolation] indicate that the Shroud itself dates from around the time of Jesus, the probability will be overwhelming that what we have on the Shroud is the vera imago of Jesus.

    But it does mean that it could be. I would put is a lot stronger than that: It is almost certain as certain as any historical fact can be that the Shroud of Turin is the very burial sheet of Jesus! Hamilton sells herself short. I am not a working scientist but I do have a Bachelor of Science degree and am a relief high school teacher who teaches Science amongst other subjects, and I can assure her that an intelligent layperson, as she undoubtedly is, can evaluate what the scientists who did these tests, because: The report of Prof.

    What I can do is tell you that I have read that the tests were performed on the same strands taken from the Shroud for the carbon dating tests that concluded the Shroud originated in the Middle Ages. Yes, Fanti et al. Giovanni Riggi, who cut the sample from the Shroud which was then subdivided between the three radiocarbon dating laboratories, Oxford, Tucson and Zurich.


    • Turin Shroud: the latest evidence will challenge the sceptics | Catholic Herald.
    • BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Turin shroud 'older than thought';
    • how to know if your dad is dating someone?
    • free dating site belgium!
    • 'Finding Jesus': Shroud of Turin Q&A.
    • ;
    • Scientists who performed the more recent tests which yielded the dates of origin for the Shroud that place it in the time of Christ say that the original samples were contaminated and that this is why they gave inaccurate results. The agnostic art historian Thomas de Wesselow right , who believes the Shroud was Jesus' but does not believe in Jesus' resurrection , considers this to be a possibility: Essentially, though, there are three possibilities.

      The first is that the Shroud sample given to the laboratories was contaminated in some way or chemically altered, so that the C levels they detected were greater than they should have been. In the vast majority of cases, when carbon-dating tests yield suspect results, it is because some natural process has interfered with the regular ticking of the radiocarbon clock.

      The most obvious explanation for the dubious carbon-dating result is that some form of contamination was present or that the level of C in the material was otherwise enhanced. As noted above, the measurement errors caused by such processes can be spectacular - in the range of thousands of years. There is evidence that tests on linen are particularly prone to distortion. In the late s Dr Rosalie David of the Manchester Museum had samples from an Egyptian mummy carbon-dated at the British Museum, only [] to find that the bandages were dated to 1, years younger than the body.

      In David coauthored an article along with Harry Gove and others in which new experiments conducted on ancient Egyptian ibis mummies were reported. It was found that 'there was a very significant discrepancy, an average of years, between the dating of the mummy's linen wrappings and the mummy itself'. The samples used in the test were cleaned using standard methods, but, as Gove remarks, 'One of the problems with small samples is that one never knew when the cleaning procedure was sufficient.

      Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," pp. An early suggestion was that some form of C enrichment took place in , when the Shroud was scorched and burnt. Without access to the Shroud, it is difficult to see how any further progress can be made in this type of investigation. The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection," pp. De Wesselow considers it to be also a possibility that the corner of the Shroud from which the radiocarbon sample was cut, had been invisibly repaired with younger cloth: This idea has been vigorously promoted by two amateur researchers, Sue Benford and Joe Marino.

      Studying threads obtained from both the Raes sample and the adjacent carbon- dating sample, Rogers found that they were coated in a gum containing alizarin and red lakes - in other words, a dye. None of the threads he examined from the main body of the Shroud shared this dye. At the very least, Rogers's observations constitute evidence that the carbon-dating sample was taken from a suspect corner of the Shroud. De Wesselow even considers it a possibility as I do that the "medieval Arguments to this effect have come from quarters as diverse as members of an ultra-conservative Catholic Counter-Reformation group, who think there was a Masonic plot to discredit the Shroud, and the 'heretical' German writers Holger Kersten and Elmar Gruber, who believe that the Catholic Church rigged the result, fearful that the Shroud might prove Jesus did not die on the cross.

      The Turin Shroud and the Truth About the Resurrection"] Most sindonologists regard these fraud theories as plainly incredible.

      Documentary - BBC — Shroud of Turin

      One important consideration weighs in favour of the possibility of deception. If the carbon-dating error was accidental, then it is a remarkable coincidence that the result tallies so well with the date always claimed by sceptics as the Shroud's historical debut. But if fraud was involved, then it wouldn't be a coincidence at all. Because as an art historian, de Wesselow points out that the claim the Shroud was made in the 14th century, is the equivalent of a claim that "the Shroud was deposited in medieval France by aliens"!: Higgs discovery rumour is denied.

      Monday, 31 January, , Turin shroud 'older than thought'. The radiocarbon sample has completely different chemical properties than the main part of the shroud relic Raymond Rogers. I think it would be better if it remained a mystery Benjamin, Pittsburgh. Tradition has often been confirmed by scientific investigation Nancy Robinson, Pittsburgh. The eternal battle of science and religion is really fascinating Claudia Costa, Fairfax Virginia. The church does not need such relics, they belong in a museum John, London UK.