Carbon Dating Analysis:
One week after Rogers' Research
Arif Khan

One week after the conclusive evidence of Raymond Rogers has been published and the world's media have had a chance to give coverage to this story, we look at their comment along with exploring the implications of these findings.

Has the world's press missed the point here? Do the findings support the conspiracy claims put forward by researchers, such as Holger Kersten, or finally lay them to rest?

The key element of Rogers' research findings was that the sample used for the carbon dating was not part of the original cloth.

This fact was expounded through kinetic tests, chemical analysis, physical analysis and general observation.

Yet the world's press headlined articles on his analysis highlighting his very speculative estimate of the age of the shroud of between 1300-3000 years old. The range given by Rogers is wide enough for it to be clear that this is a very speculative estimate. The analysis of his paper at this website illustrated that these estimate dates were obtained by looking at the rate at which vanillin from the lingen was lost.

Using mathematical analysis, if the average temperature the shroud was stored at over its life span was 20 degrees centigrade it would take 3000 years to lose 95% of its vanillin. Had it been stored at 25 degrees it would have taken 1300 years.

The history of the shroud is a complete mystery to many, and thus its almost impossible to speculate at what climate it had been stored.

The solid, concrete conclusion of Rogers' work was that when using 4 very different types of test to compare the area from which the C14 sample was taken and the rest of the shroud, each test showed the C14 sample had very different properties to the rest of the Shroud.

More >>

The negative face first seen by Secunda Pia

Rogers' research is not just another piece of evidence supporting the authenticity of the shroud. It is evidence undermining the case for the medieval date of the shroud which is primarily built upon the carbon dating result. His research removes that foundation, which makes all the theories built upon it unassured.

His own speculation about what age the Shroud should be based on his kinetic experiments and mathematical model should only be taken as a crud estimate.

The key point is that the C14 test is invalid, so another test is needed.

Conspiracy

Where does this leave the conspiracy theorists? There are those who felt the samples for the testing of the Shroud were switched at some stage. The samples given to the laboratories were not from the Shroud itself.

On the surface Rogers' research seems to support this evidence, but in fact it puts such arguments to rest. Rogers had access to the samples from the actual C14 threads that were used, and also to a sample taken from an area adjacent to where the C14 sample was cut.

If during the cutting and sealing of the samples to be sent to the laboratories a switch had occurred, then tests showing the sample to be very different to the shroud would be expected. However Rogers also was able to test a sample that was taken from alongside the area where the C14 sample was taken from. If the C14 sample was switched, then there would not be similar properties between the C14 sample and the other sample taken from the same area.

More >>

What we find, however, is that both samples showed strong similarities, and both were at odds with the rest of the Shroud.

Does the possibility remain that both the samples Rogers had were substituted? This is possible, but there is evidence the area from which the samples were taken in 1988 for the C14 tests had something anomalous about it from the start. The UV florescence images highlight that there was something different about that corner.

So no substitution is likely, but the question still remains, if these UV images of shroud were taken in 1978, why in 1988 was this evidence ignored whilst taking the samples?

Ian Wilson explains in a recent 'Secrets of the Dead' special on the Shroud of Turin that at the time of choosing from where to cut the sample an argument erupted between two Italians that was quite heated.

The final decision from where to take the sample has now proved to be a disastrous one for obtaining an accurate date for the Shroud. Was this just bad luck?

This question still today remain unanswered.