How did the Turin Shroud get its image? - BBC News
Turin Shroud (TS) is a linen cloth m long and m wide which shows two, . In , the TS was radiocarbon-dated to A.D. , but the results are only the Primary Cell Wall is colored, while the inner cellulose is not. . In various occasions, but principally in during STURP campaign [14,16], particles. Valencia, April , . 5 P.E. DAMON et al., Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin, in Nature , (), pp. ; . approx. years «older» than the bandages), which led us to speculate that the mummy out a campaign of accusations saying the Church fears the truth and is an enemy of. The Shroud of Turin, a linen cloth that tradition associates with the crucifixion and burial of . We are faced with actual blackmail: unless we accept the conditions imposed by the laboratories, they will start a marketing campaign of accusations against . It may not have taken us long to identify the strange material, but it was .
Even if it is proven that the shroud dates to c. It simply proves that you have a year-old burial shroud. Historically interesting, yes, and relatively unique, but the connection between this cloth and Jesus Christ is stretching the imagination so far as to be ridiculous. Only the faithful will believe it anyway, and those people who need their faith to be bolstered by something as trivial as this need to question why they believe in the first place. The altars of Catholic Europe are full of the interred bones of saints who, if their existence is to be believed, must have had 7 legs and 97 ribs.
Frank Wognum, Duffort, France I think that regardless of whether it is or is not Christ's burial cloth, testing should still be allowed to take place.
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Turin shroud 'older than thought'
They only way any truth can be gained from the shroud is through testing it's age again - to get some measure of certainty. David Appleyard, Halifax, UK Tradition has often been confirmed by scientific investigation Nancy Robinson, Pittsburgh The Shroud is one of the most intriguing antiquities in the world.
I am excited by this new information. Tradition has often been confirmed by scientific investigation. Maybe, some day, we'll find that the 'story' was true! Instead of wasting resources trying to prove what will not add any value to the body of Christ, I feel such resources should be channelled to orphanages and homes where it will help humanity to the glory of God. Patrick, Nigeria The shroud of Turin is a masterpiece whether or not it is the image of Christ.
I work with fibres and dyes, and the beauty and skill of the image from so long ago is a wonder to behold. How did it happen chemically? Treasure it, study it, and enjoy it as any great masterpiece. While science continues to disprove and now prove the Shroud of Turin to be older than the previous results, people's believes get stronger each day, by absorbing science findings as part of the foundation of their religion.
- Forensics Experts Say the Shroud of Turin is Probably a Hoax
- Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
- Turin Shroud may have been created by earthquake from time of Jesus
Claudia Costa, Fairfax Virginia I believe the most interesting fact concerning the Turin Shroud is that it bears blood stains. If so, this would show that Jesus was not actually dead when he was wrapped in it, and that Christian theology has been based on a false premise, and it would enable us to analyse his DNA and identify his descendants.
J S Walker I would like to look at who sponsored the research - but even if this evidence is correct, it in no way substantiates that the image is that of Jesus. The fact that it appears to be an imprint of a person who died in a similar fashion is not conclusive - thousands died in this unimaginable way around the same period. But as a medical and historical artefact it is no less fascinating. The church probably possesses many other such fakes created by medieval superstition. The church does not need such relics, they belong in a museum.
How did the Turin Shroud get its image?
John, London UK Personally, I do believe the shroud is Christ's burial cloth, and the new proper dating concludes that it does indeed fall within the correct time frame. What should be noted here is that even if we find undeniable evidence that this is Christ's burial shroud there will be always be people that will still vehemently deny this fact. The reasons are many but it mostly comes down to a problem of the heart and choosing to believe or not to believe in the claims that Christ made concerning His identity and the works and miracles of His earthly ministry.
This denial has been going on for years the shroud being dated correctly will unfortunately not change that. Rob, Toronto, Canada I think it could well be Christ's burial cloth, and it should be tested properly now to establish this once and for all before the fabric becomes too fragile.
Surely this would be in the interests of Christians worldwide and not just those adhering to the Roman Catholic faith. Joan Whyte, Mintlaw, Aberdeenshire The new evidence is interesting in what it may say about the cloth, but as a Christian I've never been surprised at any test showing that the Turin shroud was not Christ's burial cloth.
Gareth Griffith, Cheltenham, UK Those who believe will not be convinced otherwise and vice versa Carolina, Netherlands I don't see what difference it makes. Those who believe will not be convinced otherwise and vice versa. In my opinion, it is unlikely that it is the shroud, like the lance and the grail and all the other things associated with Jesus.
Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly. However, in a paper Gove conceded that the "arguments often raised, … that radiocarbon measurements on the shroud should be performed blind seem to the author to be lacking in merit; … lack of blindness in the measurements is a rather insubstantial reason for disbelieving the result.
We are faced with actual blackmail: Among the most obvious differences between the final version of the protocol and the previous ones stands the decision to sample from a single location on the cloth.
Testore performed the weighting operations while Riggi made the actual cut. Also present were Cardinal Ballestrero, four priests, archdiocese spokesperson Luigi Gonella, photographers, a camera operator, Michael Tite of the British Museum, and the labs' representatives. An outer strip showing coloured filaments of uncertain origin was discarded. The other half was cut into three segments, and packaged for the labs in a separate room by Tite and the archbishop.
Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin - Wikipedia
The lab representatives were not present at this packaging process, in accordance with the protocol. The labs were also each given three control samples one more than originally intendedthat were: Official announcement[ edit ] In a well-attended press conference on October 13, Cardinal Ballestrero announced the official results, i.
The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature. Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable. Since the C14 dating at least four articles have been published in scholarly sources contending that the samples used for the dating test may not have been representative of the whole shroud.
Rogers took 32 documented adhesive-tape samples from all areas of the shroud and associated textiles during the STURP process in On 12 DecemberRogers received samples of both warp and weft threads that Luigi Gonella claimed to have taken from the radiocarbon sample before it was distributed for dating.
The actual provenance of these threads is uncertain, as Gonella was not authorized to take or retain genuine shroud material,  but Gonella told Rogers that he excised the threads from the center of the radiocarbon sample. He stated that his analysis showed: The main part of the shroud does not contain these materials. Based on this comparison Rogers concluded that the undocumented threads received from Gonella did not match the main body of the shroud, and that in his opinion: It may not have taken us long to identify the strange material, but it was unique amongst the many and varied jobs we undertake.History of the Shroud of Turin- Barrie Schwortz
She has rejected the theory of the "invisible reweaving", pointing out that it would be technically impossible to perform such a repair without leaving traces, and that she found no such traces in her study of the shroud. Gove helped to invent radiocarbon dating and was closely involved in setting up the shroud dating project. He also attended the actual dating process at the University of Arizona.
Gove has written in the respected scientific journal Radiocarbon that: If so, the restoration would have had to be done with such incredible virtuosity as to render it microscopically indistinguishable from the real thing. Even modern so-called invisible weaving can readily be detected under a microscope, so this possibility seems unlikely.