Announcement

Collapse

Archeology 201 Guidelines

If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.

Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?

Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.

Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Shroud of Turin - Evidence for reweaving

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shroud of Turin - Evidence for reweaving

    There's only one viable explanation for why the C14 datings of the Shroud of Turin isn't correct: The shroud underwent a repair after a burn in the fourteenth century, and this weaving is completely invisible. Therefore while the C14 dating is correct, it simple ends up pointing to the age of the repair. This is how its always presented to me, but its stated as fact that such a repair has taken place by Shroud supporters, not as conjecture.

    If its not conjecture, then there must be good evidence for it, but I've never seen that evidence. Any Shroud supporters here who can give some good reasons for supposing this?

    Personally I don't get why the Vatican doesn't give permission for a sample to taken from the middle for a final and official test. If it confirms the original C14 datings, then all discussion should cease. This is not a genuine relic, its something else. If it does point to proper age, then this would make the Shroud of Turin even more interesting than it is now.
    Last edited by Leonhard; 05-29-2014, 06:49 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
    There's only one viable explanation for why the C14 datings of the Shroud of Turin isn't correct: The shroud underwent a repair after a burn in the fourteenth century, and this weaving is completely invisible. Therefore while the C14 dating is correct, it simple ends up pointing to the age of the repair. This is how its always presented to me, but its stated as fact that such a repair has taken place by Shroud supporters, not as conjecture.

    If its not conjecture, then there must be good evidence for it, but I've never seen that evidence. Any Shroud supporters here who can give some good reasons for supposing this?

    Personally I don't get why the Vatican doesn't give permission for a sample to taken from the middle for a final and official test. If it confirms the original C14 datings, then all discussion should cease. This is not a genuine relic, its something else. If it does point to proper age, then this would make the Shroud of Turin even more interesting than it is now.

    The Shroud has undergone multiple repairs in its history - mostly around the edges because it was often hung from them and near the burned areas.

    EVIDENCE FOR THE SKEWING OF THE C-14 DATING OF THE SHROUD OF TURIN DUE TO REPAIRS

    Historical Support of a 16th Century Restoration in the Shroud C-14 Sample Area


    There's a really good site somewhere with great pics but I haven't the time to hunt it down right now.


    EDIT: Found this: http://st-johns-on-the-hill.org/shro...n/slide85.html
    Last edited by Teallaura; 05-29-2014, 09:38 AM.

    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

    My Personal Blog

    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

    Comment


    • #3
      I do not consider the C14 dating problem a major issue concerning the authenticity of the shroud.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        I do not consider the C14 dating problem a major issue concerning the authenticity of the shroud.
        Actually the C14 dating is the only problem I have with it, and as it is right now I don't know enough of the case for reweaving to justify doubt in C14's veracity. Some of the tests done by Raymond Rogers haven't been replicated by anyone, especially that odd vanillin test, which destroyed the samples he worked with. All those need to be replicated independently.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
          Actually the C14 dating is the only problem I have with it, and as it is right now I don't know enough of the case for reweaving to justify doubt in C14's veracity. Some of the tests done by Raymond Rogers haven't been replicated by anyone, especially that odd vanillin test, which destroyed the samples he worked with. All those need to be replicated independently.
          The history of the shroud involves contamination from different sources over time, which is bad news for C14 dating.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            The history of the shroud involves contamination from different sources over time, which is bad news for C14 dating.
            Not enough to invalidate the dating of the fibres themselves. The question remains whether the fibres that were dated were from a repair, or whether they are part of the actual shroud.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Leonhard View Post
              Not enough to invalidate the dating of the fibres themselves. The question remains whether the fibres that were dated were from a repair, or whether they are part of the actual shroud.
              The material can be contaminated by dust and handling, which was common, and it was apparently involved in a fire. The smoke (ash) from the fire can contaminate the material.

              Some information is apparently available as to where the repairs were made. At present I find a lack of specifics as to standards and procedures of the sampling of the shroud, without reference to the repairs themselves..
              Last edited by shunyadragon; 05-30-2014, 07:49 AM.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment

              Related Threads

              Collapse

              Topics Statistics Last Post
              Started by rogue06, 11-23-2020, 07:11 PM
              9 responses
              60 views
              0 likes
              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
              Started by rogue06, 11-09-2020, 06:44 AM
              1 response
              11 views
              0 likes
              Last Post rogue06
              by rogue06
               
              Started by Seeker, 11-01-2020, 12:47 AM
              8 responses
              69 views
              0 likes
              Last Post ReformedApologist  
              Started by Teallaura, 08-05-2018, 08:07 PM
              42 responses
              7,533 views
              0 likes
              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
              Working...
              X