Anytime I report on the Turin shroud I end up under fire. My latest article is no exception. I've been inundated with choleric emails from upset readers, atheists, and skeptics. I was served the same plate of angry notes when I reported on studies that pointed in the opposite direction.
I think that anytime something is written about a subject that people hold dear, passionate reactions will ensue. But, in my experience -- and I have been reporting on shroud research for the past 10 years -- no other topic has received such violent reactions as the Turin shroud has.
I'm going to be brave and write about the Turin shroud again. As those who read the article will know, the BBC aired last Saturday a controversial documentary. Indeed, Shroud of Turin – A Conflict of Evidence has stirred new doubts about the radiocarbon testing.
Based on information about C-14 dating that wasn't available 20 years ago, a new hypothesis formulated by John Jackson, the director of the Turin Shroud Center in Colorado, suggests that a mere two percent contamination could skew results by 1,300 years.
Unlike many other individuals involved in the ongoing debate over the shroud, Christopher Ramsey, director of England's Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit, which carried out the tests in 1988, seems to make every attempt at keeping an open mind. He believed the new theory was worth investigating. In the BBC documentary, he even called for the scientific community to revisit the subject.
Here are some key points from the documentary -- courtesy of Performance Films, Ltd.
 |
John Jackson suggests that the shroud might have been contaminated with carbon monoxide. He took some modern linen samples and submitted them to all the possible conditions that the shroud itself could have been exposed to: extreme heat, ultraviolet light, handling, water, and so on. |
 |
Initial tests show that in normal conditions there is no contamination at the level needed to alter radiocarbon dates at all. According to Ramsey, the original medieval date is still most likely to be correct, based on current evidence. |
Ramsey believes it is necessary to test whether there is anything in the specific storage conditions of the shroud that might affect its dating.
 |
Ramsey said: ‘Further research on the Turin shroud is certainly needed. It is important that we continue to investigate anything that might have affected the accuracy of the original radiocarbon tests. It is equally important that other experts critically assess and reinterpret all the evidence, which may point to an earlier date.’ |
A BBC documentary, to be aired on Easter Sunday, is going to reopen the debate around the dating of the Turin shroud, one of the most controversial relics in Christendom.
Venerated by many Catholics as the proof that Christ was resurrected from the grave, the shroud was dismissed as a brilliant, medieval fake twenty years ago, following radiocarbon dating.
Indeed, in 1988, three reputable laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona, concluded that the cloth on which the smudged outline of the body of a man is indelibly impressed, was a medieval fake dating from 1260 to 1390, and not the burial cloth wrapped around the body of Christ.
Since then, the shroud has been at the centre of increasing debates over the validity of the carbon-14 tests.
The latest claim, based on microchemical tests, suggested that the sample used for the 1988 dating was taken not from the shroud, but from a rewoven area of the linen.
The documentary will investigate “a new hypothesis that could explain how a genuinely old linen could produce a much younger date in certain conditions,” according to a press release by Performance Films, the UK based film production house behind the documentary.
Performance Films said: “Professor Christopher Ramsey of the Oxford Laboratory that did the original C14 test is collaborating on experiments to test the hypothesis. The results of this collaboration will be revealed in the film.” Of course.
Much, much more to come next week. Stay tuned.
Recent Comments