Team of scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory confirm the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was invalid.

Using some of the most advanced analytical equipment available, a team of nine scientists at the famed Los Alamos National Laboratory confirmed that the material used for radiocarbon dating of the shroud in 1988 was not part of the shroud's fabric. Previously, micro-chemical tests had demonstrated that the cloth is at least twice as old as the medieval date determined by the now discredited carbon 14 tests. This gives new life to historical and forensic arguments that suggest that the shroud might be the burial cloth of Jesus.

PRESS RELEASE

COLUMBUS, Ohio, August 15 -- In his presentation today at The Ohio State University's Blackwell Center, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) chemist, Robert Villarreal, disclosed startling new findings proving that the sample of material used in 1988 to Carbon-14 (C-14) date the Shroud of Turin, which categorized the cloth as a medieval fake, could not have been from the original linen cloth because it was cotton. According to Villarreal, who lead the LANL team working on the project, thread samples they examined from directly adjacent to the C-14 sampling area were "definitely not linen" and, instead, matched cotton. Villarreal pointed out that "the [1988] age-dating process failed to recognize one of the first rules of analytical chemistry that any sample taken for characterization of an area or population must necessarily be representative of the whole. The part must be representative of the whole. Our analyses of the three thread samples taken from the Raes and C-14 sampling corner showed that this was not the case." Villarreal also revealed that, during testing, one of the threads came apart in the middle forming two separate pieces. A surface resin, that may have been holding the two pieces together, fell off and was analyzed. Surprisingly, the two ends of the thread had different chemical compositions, lending credence to the theory that the threads were spliced together during a repair.

LANL's work confirms the research published in Thermochimica Acta (Jan. 2005) by the late Raymond Rogers, a chemist who had studied actual C-14 samples and concluded the sample was not part of the original cloth possibly due to the area having been repaired. This hypothesis was presented by M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino in Orvieto, Italy in 2000. Benford and Marino proposed that a 16th Century patch of cotton/linen material was skillfully spliced into the 1st Century original Shroud cloth in the region ultimately used for dating. The intermixed threads combined to give the dates found by the labs ranging between 1260 and 1390 AD. Benford and Marino contend that this expert repair was necessary to disguise an unauthorized relic taken from the corner of the cloth. A paper presented today at the conference by Benford and Marino, and to be published in the July/August issue of the international journal Chemistry Today, provided additional corroborating evidence for the repair theory.

Blogging from Ohio State University at the Shroud of Turin Conference.

Comments

[Dr. Peter J. Shield]

I have just returned from the Ohio convention attended by shroud experts from around the world, where the findings of the Los Alamos National Labs. have proved beyond any doubt that the piece of cloth tested in 1988 was in fact cotton not linen and is therefor not representative of the central shroud image! http://worldofunexplainedmysteries.com

[R.J. Z.]

Concerning the idea of a 1300 reweave - If this was true the carbon dating would have come out to be about 600 to 700 AD - not about 1300.
It's possible the associated fibers where not a reweave at all - but the way the "shroud" was originally constructed in the 1300 - that would also explain the carbon dating.

[Dan Porter]

Actually, the theory is not that the cloth was rewoven in the 1300s, but in mid-1600s, for which there is considerable historical evidence. The calculation is not a simple linear average and indeed original cloth from the first century CE and mending thread from the 17th century yield the dates arrived at if the ratio is roughly 50/50, which it is.

This was not the way the cloth was manufactured. It was all linen. I the area of the C14 sample, and only in this area is cotton fiber found twisted in a spliced with linen. Moreover, the cotton is dyed to match the older linen. Nowhere else is any dye or a mordant found.

[RJZ]

Dan - you have come out with a lot of absolutes - with very little samples (lack of evidence for what you claim).
Really no more claims can be made without more tested samples - which the church seems not willing to do.
Maybe some day the truth will be detected.
How about discussing the figure itself - the disportionality and anatomical errors. Try covering your groin with your hands lying down in a relaxed position - it does not work. One arm and fingers look larger than the other. One view (front/rear) is longer than the other. The head is so disfigured - it's a joke - eyes to high, etc. If the cloth was wrapping - touching the body the picture is all wrong.
what about it.

[RJZ]

If it was rewoven in 1600 - the c14 test would have come out as 800 +/- say 100 or 200 years.
There's no way you can calculate it adjusting it to make up for the time error.
Your sample is just a few fibers. All this IS THEORY - no facts.

[RJZ]

I guess DAN or no one else (of the Shroud Freaks)- wants to discuss the OBVIOUS MISTAKES in the figure on the Shroud.

[Dan]

Look, RJZ, if you would read some of Isabel Pikzak's work, or Fred Zugibe, you would have an understanding of the realism of the Anatomy. The body was not in a relaxed position if it was in rigor. But I don't think you want to have a discussion. About 120 scientists and scholars in the Shroud Science Group (some are not Christians) are not freaks and that ends the discussion.

[RJZ]

Look Dan - It's your use of pro references only that avoids discussion. There are pro and con references..
Rigor does not explain the figures OBVIOUS MISTAKES. You need an open mind to have discussion - look at both sides of the questions - until further testing of the Shroud - we can agree to disagree --- FINISHED