Problems with radio carbon dating

11 Jan

It is hypothesised that the sampled area was a medieval repair which was conducted by "invisible reweaving".

group expected to perform the radiometric examination under its own aegis and after the other examinations had been completed, while the laboratories considered radio-carbon dating to be the prime test, which should be completed at the detriment of other tests, if necessary.On 12 December 2003, Rogers received samples of both warp and weft threads that Prof.Luigi Gonella claimed to have taken from the radiocarbon sample before it was distributed for dating.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.that radio-carbon testing dated the shroud to a date of 1260-1390 AD, with 95% confidence.The official and complete report on the experiment was published in Nature.These included an article by American chemist Raymond Rogers, who conducted chemical analysis for the Shroud of Turin Research Project and who was involved in work with the Shroud since the STURP project began in 1978.Rogers took 32 documented adhesive-tape samples from all areas of the shroud and associated textiles during the STURP process in 1978. Luigi Gonella (from the Department of Physics, at the Polytechnic University of Turin) on 14 October 1979, which Gonellla told him were from the Raes sample.As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G.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." Although the quality of the radiocarbon testing itself is unquestioned, criticisms have been raised regarding the choice of the sample taken for testing, with suggestions that the sample may represent a medieval repair fragment rather than the image-bearing cloth.