Even in the official 1988 C-14 Nature report there is evidence the samples were not homogeneous. They identified cotton found on the shroud. Oxford thank P. H. South (Precision Process (Textiles) Ltd, Derby) for examining and identifying the cotton found on the shroud sample https://www.shroud.com/nature.htm They said pretreatment cleaning would be wasteful. The only thing …
In Gilbert Raes’ report from his sample that was cut in 1973, he had noted the presence of cotton fibers in his sample. It must be pointed out, however, that in some of the preparations from the warp as well as from the weft of Piece I, traces of cotton fibers were observed. It would …
John Brown, principal research scientist at Georgia Tech Research Institute, studied some threads from the Raes sample and found evidence of cotton threads with dye applied to it. Where the threads crossed, there was not any dye. Figure 1 shows a weft thread, R7, at an original magnification of 28X. The thread has a yellow-brown …
Read more “John Brown confirms presence of cotton in C-14 sample”
Here’s what you posted: Athetotheist wrote: ↑Wed Feb 08, 2023 8:29 pm Don’t know how many of you are old enough to remember this but you may want to take a look, paying particular attention to 13:48-17:00. I assume you are referring to the “bas-relief” technique by Joe Nickell. Nickell and others contend the Shroud …
Robert Villarreal, a Los Alamos National Lab chemist, carried on the research on a sample Rogers had after Rogers passed away. From a purely scientific perspective, a number of excellent and important papers were presented. Most notable among these was the paper presented by Robert Villarreal of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The paper, titled, …
Read more “Robert Villarreal confirms chemical differences in sample”
After Marino and Benford presented their paper at the Sindone 2000 conference, Barrie Schwortz posted their paper on his shroud.com website. Ray Rogers, the lead chemist of STURP, read the paper and was mad at Schwortz for posting conspiracy theories, esp from amateurs. Rogers was one of the STURP scientists that accepted the 1988 C-14 …
Read more “Ray Rogers confirmed C-14 sample was not homogeneous”
After the 1988 C-14 dating results, pretty much it convinced the world that the TS was a fake. Even many STURP scientists had blindly accepted it and stopped their research on it. Many years later, it was a housewife, who was not even a shroud professional, that turned it all upside down. Sue Benford brought …
DrNoGods wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2023 5:05 pm along with their (apparent) refusal to subsequently allow more testing to definitively answer the question as to when the shroud was made. Technically, I don’t think the church has explicitly stated no further C-14 testing will be allowed on the shroud. However, I believe the RCC will …
Read more “Why I believe the church will not allow anymore tests on the shroud”
To summarize the procedural problems with the 1988 C-14 dating of the TS: 1. Only a single sample location was taken from the shroud. viewtopic.php?p=1111672#p1111672 2. Bias was demonstrated by the C-14 labs in their role in kicking out STURP from participating in the tests and preventing their proposal of additional non-destructive tests to be …
For honest scientific work to be done, all gathered data should be considered. You cannot just pick and choose data and manipulate the data in order to get the desired results. Since 2017, when scientists were able to get access to the raw C-14 data and analyze it, it has been discovered the labs had …