The 1988 C-14 dating of the TS is considered the top evidence against the authenticity of the shroud. During the past 15+ pages, I’ve argued the C-14 evidence can be dismissed. Here is a summary of my arguments:
1. It is often claimed the C-14 dating is conclusive evidence the shroud is a fake. Even the official Nature report makes this claim.
The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the Shroud of Turin is mediaeval.
https://www.shroud.com/nature.htm
But, if this single evidence can be used as a trump card against all the other evidence for the shroud’s authenticity, then it can likewise be claimed that coal deposits are less than 40,000 years old and all theories that involve deep time (evolution, geologic processes) are conclusively false.
viewtopic.php?p=1110947#p1110947
viewtopic.php?p=1111485#p1111485
2. Supposing the TS was actually dated to 1260-1390, it still leaves several questions unanswered — who did it and how did the image on the cloth get created? It makes no sense to say we don’t know these answers and to also claim it’s a fake.
viewtopic.php?p=1111279#p1111279
Additionally, there is no other corroborating evidence that it’s a work of a medieval artist.
viewtopic.php?p=1111305#p1111305
3. There were many problems with the C-14 testing procedure and I presented in detail 12 procedural issues. Because of these, “at best, it would be a scientific mistrial. At worst, it would be scientific misconduct. Either way, it would render the entire testing void.”
viewtopic.php?p=1113255#p1113255
4. The sample used by the C-14 labs have multiple lines of evidence the sample was not homogeneous, so it is therefore not a representative sample of the entire cloth and renders the C-14 dating invalid.
viewtopic.php?p=1113898#p1113898
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=1114068#p1114068