The shroud of turin new carbon dating

01 Mar

Are there questions about the effect of thymol which was used to disinfect the shroud’s reliquary.

There are controversies about such concerns and that is just the point.

Recent robust statistical studies add weight to this theory.

Philip Ball, the former physical science editor for Nature when the carbon dating results were published, recently wrote: “It’s fair to say that, despite the seemingly definitive tests in 1988, the status of the Shroud of Turin is murkier than ever.” If we wish to be scientific we must admit we do not know how old the cloth is.

Many open issues need to be addressed before testing.

For instance, are there any unresolved questions about how suitable carbon dating is for linen as evidenced by tests on human and ibis mummies?

Again, this is all published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

To minimize future accusations of mistakes or shenanigans (I like that word), media representatives should be involved in every phase of the test.The protocol must be widely published in detail well in advance of the testing.I would allow for a review panel and a public report.Years ago, as a skeptic of the Shroud, I came to realize that while I might believe it was a fake, I could not know so from the facts.Now, as someone who believes it is the real burial shroud of Jesus of Nazareth, I similarly realize that a leap of faith over unanswered questions is essential.