Carbon dating shroud video eu dating net inurleu dating net
Is there any good debunking of this, more importantly, the letter?What's unusual about trying to get a control sample?But since this produced an image, and light typically radiates out in all directions, how did a giant lightbulb not simple zap the whole cloth the same color?Did the tip of the nose shine brighter than his eye lids somehow?There are so many reasons to be skeptical of the shroud's authenticity, and so few reasons to think it's anything but a cloth with some weird marks. They also all have their own ranges of error, say from 150 BCE to 50CE as an example.The first possible historical record dates from 1353 or 1357. and the first certain record (in Lirey, France) in 1390 when Bishop Pierre d' Arcis wrote a memorandum to Pope Clement VII (Avignon Obedience), stating that the shroud was a forgery and that the artist had confessed. What proponents have done is they have averaged the averages to say that it dates correctly. First, you don't take the dates of a chemical test and the dates of a physical stress test and average them to get a "better" date. Third, each "new" test science comes up with will influence the results of completely unrelated disciplines. That's gonna (somehow) affect the results we got from it's chemical makeup! If you want to consider the shroud seriously, look at the tests and their result ranges independently.But if so then this would show that they do not want to test the actual shroud, for what reason I can think of is that the shroud could actually have some surprising test results that would support the shroud's authenticity.(That's my theory since it seems many of the men involved were atheist or non-religious which can cause bias) I've also seen numerous other claims such as the 1988 testing violating 14 protocols, and that the piece they tested does not match the actual shroud piece.
But now I'm not sure if the 1988 carbon dating of it is even authentic now. I know that this website is catholic, but it contains a letter apparently written by Dr Tite, one of the people involved in the 1988 test of the shroud.
Doing it correctly is tricky;one should weigh dates more if one considers them to be more reliable, and deciding how to do that is in general not easy.
This sort of thing is pretty vulnerable to monkeying with if one wants a specific result, but the basic idea is sound.
It is assumed this was made from a coin from the Pilate era? If you have a few clustered dates which are close to each other, then an average will in general be more accurate.
This doesn't work in this case because one is having people average dates which are wildly off from each other, but the basic idea is sound.