Shroud of Turin Facts Check - Site Map: 2005 Facts

Shroud of Turin Facts Check Site Map

Carbon 14 Dating Archeological Successes
Historical Support of a 16th Century Restoration in the Shroud C-14 Sample Area
History of Carbon 14 Dating
Carbon 14 Dating - Bones, Cloth Fibers, Wood
A Carbon Dating Catastrophe with the Shroud of Turin
The d'Arcis Memorandum on the Shroud of Turin
Walter McCrone's Painting Claim is False
Walter McCrone's False Claims About the Vinland Map
World View and Christianity's Shroud of Turin
Shroud of Turin Facts Check
More Facts About the Shroud of Turin
Medically Accurate Picture of a Man on the Shroud
Second Face Discovered on the Back of the Shroud of Turin
The Blood on the Shroud of Turin is Real
Facts About the Carbon 14 Dating and the Shroud of Turin
Chemistry of the Images on the Shroud of Turin
Coin Images on the Shroud of Turin - Only Maybe
Shroud of Turin History: Edessa to Turin
Shroud of Turin Negative Images Remain Unexplained
The Shroud of Turin is not a Painting or Work of Art
The 3D Information Encoded in the Shroud of Turin
Travertine Aragonite Found on the Shroud of Turin
Displaying the Shroud
Edessa Walls
Edessa Image Found
Abgar of Edessa
Epitaphios
Face on the Shroud as it appears when photographed
Man of Sorrows
Pantocrator from St. Catherine's in the Sinai
Christ Pantocrator, Church at Daphni, near Athens
Christ Pantocrator from dome of Church at Cefalu
Max Frei Taking Samples
Hungarian Pray Manuscript
Pray Codex
Collecting Particulate Matter
Sudarium of Oviedo
Weave of the cloth showing image color

Shroud of Turin Facts Check More Facts

Much of the scientific material on this site is based on the work of Ray Rogers. Rogers, a chemist, is a science Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education. He has published many scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and U.S. Government publications. In 1978, together with several other scientists, he was invited to personally examine the Shroud of Turin in Italy for several days. He collected numerous measurements and samples of fibers and particulate materials for further study. Rogers died March 8, 2005..

Editorial Comment

There is little question among those familiar with the topic that the biggest mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating was the Shroud of Turin.

Sadly, this mistake will be understood by some as meaning that carbon 14 dating is prone to error, subject to unexplainable anomalies or plagued by problems of contamination; none of which is true.

Let's be perfectly clear: carbon 14 dating is an excellent and very accurate scientific method for determining the age of many things as old as 50,000 years.

The failure to obtain a reliable date for the Shroud of Turin is not about flaws in carbon 14 dating methods or contamination. It is not about the problems, so often discussed in the media, of mysterious biological polymers growing on the cloth's fibers or new carbon introduced into the Shroud's cloth by a scorching fire in 1532.

It is not about the sloppy work by three very prestigious carbon 14 dating laboratories. And it is not, as some suggest, about conspiracies dreamed up to prove religious or anti-religious arguments (the Shroud is a religious object for some).

It is about a stupid mistake.

Let me illustrate: Recently I sent a soil sample to a testing laboratory to find out why my lawn was doing so poorly. The lab reported back that the soil was perfect for grass. It had the right nutrients and the pH was right on target, neither too acidic or alkaline.

I didn't think so. What had gone wrong?

It turns out that a few weeks earlier I had repaired a spot in my lawn where my dog had peed and killed the grass. I dug out a small section of soil and filled the hole with loam I had purchased from a garden supply store. Without realizing it, I had taken a sample for testing from that repaired area.

The sample was not representative of my lawn. It was chemically unlike the rest of my lawn. The lab had perfectly analyzed an invalid sample.

Similarly, as we now know, from National Geographic News, PBS and several scientific papers, that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was done with an invalid sample.

M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, with the help of several textile experts, undertook a detailed examination of the documentation photographs of the carbon 14 samples and identified clear indications of a medieval patch.

Independently, Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education has examined actual threads and fibers adjacent to where the samples were snipped. In a paper he published with Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, Rogers reported finding indisputable chemical evidence of a repair patch. He found dyestuff and spliced threads. Others, using scanning electronic microscopes and advanced spectral analysis tools have confirmed his findings.

This mistake of using an invalid sample should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of carbon 14 dating. Unfortunately, we live in a world of easy and careless polemics. There are some, as well, who because of religious convictions cannot accept the conclusions of carbon 14 dating. Scientists cannot properly challenge matters of faith on the basis of science alone. But it would be unfortunate if those who hold certain beliefs use an erroneous understanding about carbon 14 dating to challenge carbon 14 dating when it is not carbon 14 dating that is at fault.

The mistake must now be openly admitted in the interest of scientific integrity. It was a careless mistake, a stupid mistake, a foolish mistake.

Carbon 14 dating is an invaluable tool for archeology and science. The mistake made in dating the Shroud of Turin does not diminish this fact.

In 1898 Secondo Pia discovered the negative properties of the picture of Jesus on the Shroud

Presented by:

Shroud of Turin Story
History, Science and Many Topics

Science

Shroud of Turin face as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Face on the Shroud as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Gum encrusted cotton fiber found only in the carbon 14 sample area and not elsewhere on the Shroud of Turin.

Spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area of the Shroud of Turin

Close up view of spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area

Microscopic view of fibers from the carbon 14 area when dissolved in water.

Photomicrograph, gum is swelling and slowly detaching from the fibers and alizarin mordant lakes can be seen. Yellow dye is in solution.

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase-contrast microscopy of a single image fiber. Image is a reddish-brown caramel-like complex carbon bond, a chemical change within a super thin coating of crude starch on the fabric's outermost fibers. It is not paint or any kind of applied pigment. It is likely caused by bodily amine vapors reacting with saccharides in the starch.

Threads consisting of twisted bundles of fibers. Shows color in starch coating

This is how the face appears on the Shroud of Turin.

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image recently discovered with image analysis technology. This a a computer enhanced view. It matches the face on the front of the Shroud. The images are doubly-superficial meaning that nothing soaked through.

Picture of the Shroud of Turin