Shroud of Turin - New Date?

[Teallaura]

New scientific tests on the Shroud of Turin, which went on display Saturday in a special TV appearance introduced by the Pope, dates the cloth to ancient times, challenging earlier experiments dating it only to the Middle Ages.
Pope Francis sent a special video message to the televised event in the Cathedral of Saint John the Baptist in Turin, Italy, which coincided with Holy Saturday, when Catholics mark the period between Christ's crucifixion on Good Friday and his resurrection on Easter Sunday.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...splay/2038295/

Anyone know what the heck they did? It mentions 'infra-red light and spectroscopy' but doesn't give details.

[Raphael]

Gary Habermas will be happy with that

[Paprika]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...splay/2038295/

Anyone know what the heck they did? It mentions 'infra-red light and spectroscopy' but doesn't give details.

He really should have published the research in a journal, or at the very least made the relevant scientific reports much more accessible. The only way to find out, at the moment, is to buy his book.

[KingsGambit]

This is very interesting, though 300 BC to 400 AD is still quite a wide range so certainty will probably never be possible.

But, yes, Habermas should be very pleased as Raph said. He has been one of the few academics to consistently hold to its authenticity.

[TimelessTheist]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...splay/2038295/

Anyone know what the heck they did? It mentions 'infra-red light and spectroscopy' but doesn't give details.

I'm fairly sure Italian experts, way before this, used this computer imaging software to determin it couldn't have been faked.

[rogue06]

FWIU, Fanti, as mentioned in your link, employed infra-red light and spectroscopy but appears to have developed his own method of analyzing the data. Essentially he developed a calibration curve based on examining changes in cellulose structure on a few samples of fabrics from an assorted different time periods (ranging from 1000 to 4000 years old) and then figured where the Shroud fit into the results.

Again, FWIU, his original results showed that the Shroud was actually several hundred years older than the time of Christ but Fanti, citing the fire that the Shroud was damaged by in the 16th century, "corrected" the dates and moved the dates up so that the calculated age of the Shroud included the time that Jesus was crucified.

ETA: This from Wikipedia:

Source: Shroud of Turin: Recent Developments

Source

© Copyright Original Source

[Leonhard]

It sounds very interesting, but since there's no information about the technique used or how it was applied, there's nothing yet that really overturns the original C-14 dating, from my perspective. If its legitimate, that would be very interesting.

Addendum: Given rogue's info, if that's an adequate description, I find this new dating highly dubious.

[Teallaura]

Thanks, Rogue!


Um, Leo, Rogue's link is discussing an earlier effort, as near as I can tell. The article I cited specifically states they used samples taken in '88 - the same samples (presumably the spares or controls) that were used for the C-14.

I'd like to know exactly where the sample came from - there were big problems with the '88 sampling. I'm dubious of the '88 date - but if the sample came from the same area, I'm also dubious of this thing (if memory serves, there might be a sample from an undisputed area - but I can't swear to that).

Anyway, thanks, guys!

[Carrikature]

Thanks, Rogue!


Um, Leo, Rogue's link is discussing an earlier effort, as near as I can tell. The article I cited specifically states they used samples taken in '88 - the same samples (presumably the spares or controls) that were used for the C-14.

I'd like to know exactly where the sample came from - there were big problems with the '88 sampling. I'm dubious of the '88 date - but if the sample came from the same area, I'm also dubious of this thing (if memory serves, there might be a sample from an undisputed area - but I can't swear to that).

Anyway, thanks, guys!

Rogue's link is the same effort. Check the dating on the article you linked. Also, the article you linked says where the samples came from:

The new test, by scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy, used the same fibers from the 1988 tests but disputes the findings. The new examination dates the shroud to between 300 BC and 400 AD, which would put it in the era of Christ.

[Teallaura]

collected through vacuuming by Riggi during the 1978 STURP tests

No, it isn't - they're talking about the '78 exam. And I said my article stated the samples were from '88.

Haven't had your coffee yet, huh?

[rogue06]

Found this article concerning criticism of Fanti by Rinaldi (actually what appears to be a translation of note #17 mentioned in the Wiki entry):

Source: A Critical Review of Giulio Fanti’s New Book: Unreliable Results Because of Inadequacy of Methods

Source

© Copyright Original Source

[TimelessTheist]

However, there's one thing tgat bothers me, and that's that tge Gospels seem to contradict this. Tgey list a seperate sheet for both his head, and body.

[Teallaura]

However, there's one thing tgat bothers me, and that's that tge Gospels seem to contradict this. Tgey list a seperate sheet for both his head, and body.

There's an explanation for that - but that's another thread.

[shunyadragon]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...splay/2038295/

Anyone know what the heck they did? It mentions 'infra-red light and spectroscopy' but doesn't give details.

Considering the problematic issues with the history of the shroud, nature of the traditional shroud, and the image, does anyone actually believe the shroud is the genuine shroud of Jesus Christ?

[Teallaura]

Considering the problematic issues with the history of the shroud, nature of the traditional shroud, and the image, does anyone actually believe the shroud is the genuine shroud of Jesus Christ?

Considering that those issues have been addressed many do in fact believe it to be a First Century artifact - that being the case, Jesus' burial shroud would be the most likely explanation.

And that's a topic for another thread!