The other was the fire in 1532, this did not alter the C14 to C12 isotope ratios. Nor did it introduce meaningful quantities of new carbon into the mix. There is no scientific basis for this claim.
But now, there has been credible evidence that shows that the result of the carbon dating is flawed.
One article writes, "New studies conducted between 2001 and 2008 demonstrate that what was tested was chemically different than the rest of the cloth. Splices and the presence of dyestuff and cotton fibers suggest that the carbon 14 samples were taken from a medieval repair patch to the cloth. Furthermore, recent analysis of Lignin Decomposition Kinetics shows that the cloth is at least twice as old as the carbon 14 estimates. The results of these studies are reported in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Thermochimica Acta in a paper by the late Raymond N. Rogers, a Fellow of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, University of California (See: Volume 425 pp. 189-194) and Chemistry Today (Vol 26, Num 4, Jul/Aug 2008). Textile experts have looked at the cloth as well and found cotton fibres interwoven with the linen fibres of the cloth wich skewed the date of the cloth. Now many are demanding a retest. God willing it will happen.All the evidence point to the first photograph ever taken, the resurrection of Christ.
No comments:
Post a Comment