Shroud of turin carbon dating problems

This happens often in archaeology, even on sites and samples which were thought to be ideal for C14 dating.

Very rarely is the problem of these individual aberrant dates ever resolved or even addressed.

But those who want the Shroud to be 2000 years old still have the problem of accounting for the amount of radiocarbon actually found as opposed to the amount that should be there to give the desired age.

The other problem is that measured value, 600 years, is the only fixed point available.

In it, Rodger Sparks, a carbon dating expert from New Zealand, and William Meacham, archaeologist and Shroud researcher from Hong Kong, debated some of the theories that have been proposed regarding possible inaccuracies in the 1988 carbon dating test results.

Why, after all, does the Shroud have to be 2000 years old?

The arguments against the radiocarbon age could just as well be used to justify an age of 1000, 3000 or 5000 years.

This is not negligible, and if regarded as a uniform layer around a cylindrical thread it represents an increase in the thread thickness of around 12%.

I would have thought this would be detectable by someone with expertise in identifying textiles, and it also seems to conflict with the very slow growth rate that Garza-Valdes claims for the layer. Suppose the bioplastic layer started growing at the time the existence of the Shroud became known (perhaps the exposure to the light and atmosphere could trigger the growth).

Leave a Reply