Carbondating a scam


The Shroud of Turin, a linen cloth that tradition associates with the crucifixion and burial of Jesus, has undergone numerous scientific tests, the most notable of which is radiocarbon dating, in an attempt to determine the relic's authenticity. Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly.In 1988, scientists at three separate laboratories dated samples from the Shroud to a range of 1260–1390 CE, which coincides with the first certain appearance of the shroud in the 1350s and is much later than the burial of Jesus in 30 or 33 CE. Samples were taken on April 21, 1988, in the Cathedral by Franco Testore, an expert on weaves and fabrics, and by Giovanni Riggi, a representative of the maker of bio-equipment "Numana".The idea of scientifically dating the shroud had first been proposed in the 1960s, but permission had been refused because the procedure at the time would have required the destruction of too much fabric (almost 0.05 sq m ≅ 0.538 sq ft). P.), which involved about 30 scientists of various religious faiths, including non-Christians. Testore performed the weighting operations while Riggi made the actual cut.The development in the 1970s of new techniques for radio-carbon dating, which required much lower quantities of source material, prompted the Catholic Church to found the Shroud of Turin Research Project (S. 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. group initially planned to conduct a range of different studies on the cloth, including radio-carbon dating. The six labs that showed interest in performing the procedure fell into two categories, according to the method they utilised: In 1982, the S. The blind-test method was abandoned because the distinctive three-to-one herringbone twill weave of the shroud could not be matched in the controls, and a laboratory could thus identify the shroud sample.



group and the candidate laboratories turned into a P. However, in a 1990 paper Gove conceded that the "arguments often raised, … that discarding the blind-test method would expose the results – whatever they may be – to suspicion of unreliability. Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly. The blind-test method was abandoned, because the distinctive three-to-one herringbone twill weave of the shroud could not be matched in the controls, and it was therefore still possible for a laboratory to identify the shroud sample.



Carbondating a scam comments


  • Myths Regarding Radiocarbon Dating - The Institute for Creation. profil de paulette60

    paulette60

    For periods of time prior to this, there are legitimate reasons to question the validity of the conventional results and seek for alternative interpretations. * At time of publications, Dr. Aardsma was Chairman of the Astro/Geophysics Department in the ICR Graduate School. He received his Ph. D. from the University of Toronto.…