New
Shroud Research Showing C14 sample invalid for dating The Shroud:
The
Independent Online
Turin
Shroud is Not a Forgery, says US scientist.
Doubt has been cast on the theory that the Shroud of Turin is a
medieval fake after an American scientist published new evidence
supporting the hallowed belief that it is Christ's burial cloth.
The
Daily Telegraph, UK
The
Turin Shroud is far older than carbon dating suggests and may indeed
date to biblical times as believers claim, a study has found. The
findings may revive hopes that the cloth, far from being a medieval
fake, is a miraculous recording of the face of Jesus after the Crucifixion.
The
Turin Shroud, believed by some to be Christ's burial cloth, is much
older than previously thought, a new study has found. Research published
in the scientific journal, Thermochimica Acta, has reignited the
debate over the Shroud's origins, suggesting it is between 1,300
and 3,000 years old.
The
Times of India
The
Shroud of Turin is much older than the medieval date that modern
science has affixed to it and could be old enough to have been the
burial wrapping of Jesus, a new analysis concludes. Since 1988,
most scientists have confidently concluded that it was the work
of a medieval artist, because carbon dating had placed the production
of the fabric between 1260 and 1390.
TechNewsWorld.com
The
age of the burial cloth has been disputed for decades. The new research
backs a study by Israeli scientists who found pollen and casts of
plants which at the time solely existed in the Middle East.
Articles
related to this subject:
The
C14 Sample: Looking Deeper - Arif Khan
The
team of Sue Benford and Joseph Marino produced three research papers
each providing evidence for restoration of the shroud leading to
the skewing of the result. Amazingly Benford and Marino point out
that even during the actual cutting of the C14 sample evidence of
rewoven repairs came to light. Giovanni Riggi,the person who actually
cut the C14 sample.
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?
|