Shroud of turin carbon dating controversy
In his recent book, "Il Mistero della Sindone," translated as "The Mystery of the Shroud," (Rizzoli, 2013), Giulio Fanti, a professor of mechanical engineering at Padua University, said his analysis proves the shroud dates from 280 B. Previous examinations that dated the shroud to the Middle Ages mesh with historical records, which don't start mentioning the cloth until that time. Thomas de Wesselow, author of "The Sign: The Shroud of Turin and the Secret of the Resurrection" (Dutton Adult, 2012), argues that medieval artists did not paint in photorealistic style, and that a forged shroud created in the Middle Ages would be an anachronism.That doesn't mean the shroud is evidence of a miracle, however, de Wesselow told Live Science last year.First, we must separate the shroud from that which is responsible for bias, namely that it is the burial shroud of Jesus of Nazareth and investigate it instead as a putative artifact of a first century crucifixion and burial.The shroud has been subjected to numerous scientific tests over the years culminating in 1988 with a radiocarbon measurement and dating procedure.FACT: The shroud contains pollen grains from 58 species of plants, 17 indigenous to Europe where the artifact has been for 7 centuries and the majority being plants indigenous, some exclusively, to the area of the Dead Sea and Turkey.
This article was published in 3 parts in The Glyph, the journal of The Archaeological Institute of America, San Diego, Vol 1, No. What are the facts and how do we separate the facts from both religious and scientific bias and agenda-based conclusions? Schwortz's No single artifact of the past has so exemplified the interface between science and religion as the Shroud of Turin. Shroud photographs (not appearing in original article) are from Barrie M.It features 24 hours of battery life and claims to be a 'mini-disco on the move'. The Shroud of Turin, an icon of faith and controversy among Christians, is back in the news.