Reprinted by permission. Important news about the Shroud of Turin, believed by millions to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus Christ, has been flagrantly under-reported. Nevertheless, the lack of mainstream media interest does not diminish landmark new research contesting the results of the controversial radiocarbon test that dated the Shroud between the years and The chief complaint is that the three small Shroud test samples were cut from the same outer edge on a piece of the cloth long thought to have been added later in the Middle Ages. This would have been part of a repair or reweave on a corner that had become worn and frayed due to frequent handling when the Shroud was held up for public exhibition.
The C measurement of Shroud sample yielded result after callibaration. But statistically speaking, one part of the sample is years older than the other.
Shroud of turin carbon dating 1988
And the probability that this just a statistical error that is that the obtained results were drawn from inherently imprecise -containing statistical errors -measurements of the homogeneous sample -the p-value -is unacceptably low.
This means that if the Shroud had been woven at one time in, say AD -it is very unlikely we would have obtained the results we had. And the hypothesis that the different parts of the Shroud were woven at different times, is absurd. Then is like the average number of 3 legs among mammals.
There are the various not all that I know are included!
The numbers are actually a complete mess -almost each result contradicts almost all of the others. Yet here we are being asked to pay to see what it has or has not revealed regarding the Linen and its surviving content of C!
The Shroud - Carbon Dating
Why bother at all with statistics - which is, after all, a separate discipline from science? Random sampling is the ONLY WAY one can have any degree of confidence NOT absolute certainty whether low, intermediate or high, in the validity of final conclusions about the population, if based merely selecting small samples. So, yes, not surprisingly, the decision was made to restrict sampling to a corner region that pesky real world intruding yet again! So, non-random sampling of the Linen AND non-random division of the single sample!
Er, let me guess. Realistically speaking, the primary purpose was NOT to yield a final gold-standard answer. Yes, a third source of non-homogeneity! Simple eye-balling of results says that all 3 labs came back with a date somewhere between the mid 13th and late 14th century!
That suggests to me that while the non-existent statistical design was less-than-ideal, sob, sob, reflecting the intrusion of extraneous considerations, the actual methodology was reasonably reproducible, probably basically sound. Indeed the answers, even with the modest degree of scatter around mean, were in my humble view remarkably consistent. The ranging shot exercise had served its purpose with minimal disfiguration to the Linen.
OK, so there were inhomogeneities where data spread was concerned, with the possibility of SMALL but significant numerical trends across the width of that corner sample but NOT based on random sampling so therefore statistically OTT.
To which I say: data collection must take precedence, albeit preliminary ranging-shot data first, then checked and re-checked.
Are we looking at sampling error? Or are eternal optimists angling for the intervention of a a mind-boggling supernatural phenomenon - based on the claim of shoddy statistics - when statistics were if the truth be told sidelined, indeed ignored from the outset?
Collin, you forget the comments so soon regarding the issue of retesting. It is only a couple of days ago. Test, test, test. But other testing must now be allowed before another go at traditional carbon date testing.
Jul 23, New research is being called for on what many believe is the actual cloth in which Jesus was buried, the shroud of Turin, as the Museum of the Bible prepares for an exhibition on the subject. Search Shroud of Turin: Carbon 14 dating used in faulty, some say; Museum of Bible to open exhibit. Jul 21, Important news about the Shroud of Turin, believed by millions the results of the shroud dating were published in the Our statistical Author: Myra Kahn Adams.
If you would agree to that, then we would be on the same page. Best regards. Sorry, I disagree profoundly, Robert. We are not on the same page. Indeed we are reading from different books. Yours has additional words. So the next step MUST BE to repeat the dating with a wider range of sampling sites, if only to see whether the previous estimate of age is confirmed.
Then, and only then we can return to hypothesis whether that includes blue-sky speculation or not. Colin, you make a point.
Science is a noble and legitimate path to the truth. But science is a process, and a broad multi-disciplinary process, not single thread test based. The truth is the end we are all seeking and different paths can lead to the truth.
At this time other testing, that is also scientific in nature, besides just radiocarbon testing, must come first if the truth about the Shroud is to be advanced. No one is suggesting to turn away from sound scientifically based research. You must agree, as an honest scientist, that the Shroud custodians essentially have shut down access to the Shroud for scientific research after the radiocarbon testing results were announced.
That, as you MUST also acknowledge has hindered for over 30 years now the scientific quest for the truth about the Shroud.
You and Hugh should both now be delighted that true additional scientific studies may in the not too distant future now be permitted. We should all be on the same page for that. But it must be carefully controlled so that the tragic carbon dating fiasco is not, that is never, repeated.
Time for this frontline sceptic, correction, realist, to take a break from the eternal headbanging exercise.
KIndly hold off from spotlighting any of my latest new thinking please Dan, whether communicated here or via email.
No, it did not.
Shroud of Turin: Carbon 14 dating used in faulty, some say; Museum of Bible to open exhibit
There was fairly conclusive evidence for the medieval origin of the corner strip taken for analysis, certainly, but not for the entire Linen. That still allows for a tentative conclusion that the entire Linen is of medieval origin, but a return visit for collecting a wider, RANDOM range of samples is needed, at least in the radiocarbon-sceptic world in which we live.
Spokesmen for that second group declared at the St.
That second group wants us to view it as soberly science-based while it plays its silly games with sub-atomic physics, invoking protons for this, neutrons for that. Surely we can now move on to dark matter and dark energy.
I saw one enthusiast suggesting the image could have been etched by the body of Christ being instantly converted from matter to energy. My rough calculation was that this would have been an energy release equivalent to 80, Hiroshima scale nuclear bombs.
I think that would have laid waste to much of the Middle East. Even if one gave science a brief holiday, and entertained albeit briefly the notion of the resurrectional selfie, there are profound difficulties.
Top of my list would be the means by which selectivity of action at numerous levels could be assured. How can there selective scorching of linen at the gross level, without simultaneous scorching of hair at the same time to say nothing of heat-sensitive molecules in blood, skin etc.
And what about that so-called half-tone effect, where two linen fibres can exist side by side, one coloured yellow with image chromophore, the other totally uncoloured? In relation to radiocarbon dating I would like to know your opinion on Christen, J.
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C Applied Statistics43 3 Christen used a fairly simple technique of his own to analyse the 12 dates given by the Nature paper on the radiocarbon testing, treating them all as independent, and decided that the oldest and the youngest were outliers.
Outliers can be difficult statistical anomalies at the best of times, and deciding whether the two extremes of a range of measurements are outliers is even more contentious. However, once these were eliminated, the others were sufficiently coherent for him to consider them all consistent. Riani and Atkinson, however, built on the inconsistency observed by the authors of the Nature paper, and determined a hypothetical chronological gradient along the 4cm or 5cm strip cut into pieces for testing.
Although their gradient is statistically satisfying, it is not empirically verifiable, as the 12 pieces upon which they based their results were not recorded in position, and are now, of course, destroyed. This is not the case. There is nothing about the inconsistencies in the radiocarbon measurements that contradicts a medieval date, and plenty to refute a first century one.
I am, of course, inclined to the latter in both cases. Your opinions are important to us. We do not guarantee individual replies due to extremely high volume of correspondence. Learn more Your name Note Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email.
Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose.
Jul 16, But since some have refused to believe the bishop's findings, or the carbon dating showing the shroud was from the medieval, not the Biblical era, or the subsequent debunking of claims. 5 The Radiocarbon Dating January 13, The Turin newspaper La Stampa discloses that Professor Gove and Dr. Harbottle have written an open letter to the Pope, also to Nature and the director of the British Museum, deploring the rejection of the seven-laboratory protocol. Dating_The_Shroud_Of_Turin. Is the Carbon Dating In Error? "The Shroud Story" Brendan Whiting - This website focuses on the latest dating challenges of the Shroud of Turin. Although most Christians consider the Shroud to be the genuine burial cloth of Jesus, the results of the c (carbon) dating has been puzzling.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. Multitasking in the workplace can lead to negative emotions 5 hours ago. Relevant PhysicsForums posts Mw 6.
Nov 24, In the s, carbon testing led to a guilty verdict for the Shroud of Turin as a fraud. But researchers who pursued a legal case for the original data say it's far from certain. Jul 24, A team of researchers from France and Italy has found evidence that suggests testing of the Shroud of Turin back in was flawed. In their paper published in Oxford University's Archaeometry. Mar 23, Hat tip to Joe Marino for spotting this. The following was published yesterday, March 22, , in Archaeometry, a Wiley publication. If you don't have institutional access you can have access for 48 hours for $, print-restricted online access for $ or full rights for $ Link: Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New.
Samalas eruption in May 10, Wind Box May 08, Volcanic Ash Clouds - Why do they flatten at certain altitudes when rising? May 02, New Geological Map of Mars Apr 27, Related Stories. New study suggests Shroud of Turin a fake, supporting study retracted Jul 24, The bloodstained linen, which was scrutinized in with radiocarbon testing, and was believed to have originated between the years and - and thus deemed a "medieval hoax" by skeptics - is now being reconsidered for another round of tests.
In what some are calling an " underreported " story, some researchers are calling for new tests to be performed in light of a recent discovery about previous research that was done on the aged cloth.
According to a Catholic Herald UK report in May, in the Shroud of Turin Research Project team urged belief that the linen was authentic, writing that no known chemical or physical methods could account for the totality of the image. Yet inthe Vatican permitted the cloth to be tested again and researchers published their findings in the scientific journal Naturedeclaring it of medieval origin.
But that data has been hidden until recently as other researchers obtained in the findings though a freedom of information request. A re-examination of the data brought about additional questions about the precision of the study and calls for fresh radiocarbon tests emerged.
Following two years of tests and analysis, French researcher Tristan Casabianca and his team published an article in Archaeometry in March.