Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience
In reply to the discussion: Scientists say Turin Shroud is supernatural [View all]jberryhill
(62,444 posts)8. The date is likely correct
However, there are some interesting criticisms.
For one thing, this is not a pristine artifact either. It has been extensively handled and even repaired by interweaving new fibers from time to time. After its original appearance in France, it was acquired by the Savoy family and moved around quite a bit prior to its current home in Turin. During that time, it was exposed to several fires and other misadventures. The carbon dating samples were taken from an edge region which some critics claim shows evidence of repairs. Additionally, various backing fabrics have been sewn on to it over the course of time, and it has been stored in intimate contact with those backings and whatever contaminants may have been on them.
Aside from contamination by handling and repairs over the centuries, it is inhabited by micro-organisms, which have lived and died on it, leaving a crust of newer organic matter on the exterior surface of the fibers.
It's one thing to dig up an ancient fire pit and analyze the undisturbed remains thereof, but this is not something that has been preserved as an archaeological specimen in the course of its lifetime.
Of course it is significant that the date obtained by the prior round of radiocarbon dating corresponds fairly well to the first recorded evidence of its appearance.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So, because these "scientists" can only copy it using high-intensity ultra violet lasers,
mr blur
Dec 2011
#4
I once heard, the image was probably created with chemicals: a photography of a male model.
DetlefK
Dec 2011
#6
these "scientists" are funded by someone much like the "Discovery Institute",
AlbertCat
Dec 2011
#10
I suppose next you'll tell me that the Mayan ruins are "fake" because the deities to whom they were
AlbertCat
Dec 2011
#17