“Until
1988 a large majority of the historians, artists and scientists
who had studied the famous Turin Shroud considered that it was
genuinely the shroud of Jesus. Then came the carbon-dating tests
of 1988, and the shattering declaration that the Shroud was a
mediaeval forgery. The dating was accepted without question –
all previous evidence was overruled. … should we not think
again?” (‘The Turin Shroud is Genuine’,
fly leaf)
In
1988 the Vatican gave permission for the Holy Shroud to be subjected
to carbon-dating to try to determine by scientific means the
true age of the Shroud. The public in general knows little about
carbon-dating, how it works or how reliable it is, but when
scientists announced that the Shroud was a fake, made (somehow)
in the middle ages, this conclusion was accepted without question,
simply because it was the opinion of ‘science’.
The following information may give you pause for thought…
What
is carbon-dating?
It is by no means a simple procedure. The conditions required
for gaining an accurate reading are very complex, and if any of
these conditions is not met, the results are likely to be suspect
indeed. If you have patience to read a detailed account of what
carbon-dating actually is, click here. (Hoare,
p.96)
Carbon
atoms in a piece of cloth, or any specimen, are of two kinds:
stable and unstable. The stable ones are C12 and C13 type atoms.
The unstable carbon atoms are type C14; these atoms slowly disappear
over time, becoming nitrogen. Carbon-dating, essentially, tests
the amount of atoms in a specimen which have been converted from
C14 to nitrogen.
Hypothetically, what carbon-dating of the Shroud could tell us
was the year in which the flax from which the linen of the shroud
was manufactured ‘died’ – stopped exchanging
carbon with air, and had the same proportion of stable and unstable
carbon atoms as the atmosphere.
The
AMS method
In 1988, when the Shroud was tested, there were two methods available
for carbon-dating. The method used on the Shroud was called AMS
– ‘accelerator mass spectrometry’. The method
involved using only a very small sample (25g) of cloth.
Before carbon-dating begins, it
is vital that certain procedures are carried out to ensure that
no extra carbon has been accidentally absorbed by the material being
tested, because,
“if
some extra carbon has got into the specimen, the result is bound
to be wrong”.(Hoare,
p.97)
A
process called ‘pre-treatment’
is performed, which includes all or most of the following
steps:
The specimen is examined optically so that surface debris and
dust is removed
It is vacuum cleaned
Ultrasonics are used to remove dust and pollen
An organic solvent is applied to get rid of any grease
It is dried and weighed
It has an acid wash, followed by an alkali wash, followed by
a wash in distilled water
It is bleached to reduce its basic cellulose
It is dried and weighed, then
Sealed in a vacuum with copper oxide
Put in an oven at 950? C., where it is
burnt in the oxygen emitted by the copper oxide
After
this, the carbon dioxide which has been emitted is
put into an oven with Zinc, with some iron powder to act as
a catalyst and binder. (Zinc takes the oxygen from the carbon
dioxide, and the carbon forms in the iron powder).
The mixture of pure carbon from the specimen, and the iron powder,
is then put in the apparatus for measuring the carbon.
The
pre-treatment conditions are crucially important.
Consider the following observations made in guidelines for Carbon
Dating, published by Dr. Bowman of the British Museum:
“Many
materials used for preserving or conserving samples contain
carbon that may be impossible to remove subsequently; do not
use glues, biocides… etc. Many packing materials, such
as paper, cardboard, cotton wool and string, contain carbon
and are potential contaminants.”
(British Society for the Turin Shroud, Newsletter
No.28, April/May 1991)
N.B.
The Shroud was kept in a wooden box for most of its 2,000
year history. Moreover, in 1352 it was subjected to a ferocious
FIRE in Chambery chapel, France, which singed and damaged
it extensively (see Fire below)
Dr.
Van Oosterwych-Gastuche, one of the experts involved in the carbon-dating
of the Shroud, wrote:
“
a great many materials, including textiles such as linen, wool and
cloth … provide very anomalous C14 dates. The high surface
areas and porosity of these materials makes them very efficient
absorbers of all sorts of contaminants resistant to the pre-treatment
cleaning”.
He went on to conclude: “I
believe it is almost futile to try to calculate the true age of a
textile as badly adulterated as the Shroud”.
‘CONTAMINANTS’
WHICH COULD HAVE AFFECTED THE SHROUD:
1. The nature of the flax
used to make the Linen of the shroud:
‘as the flax grew, C14 had a preference for the central fibres
rather than the proteins, waxes and fats coating the plant. This effect
was increased during the spinning process, and could lead to an enrichment
of C14 by as much as 40%”
2. The FIRE
in Chambery chapel, 1352 which badly damaged the Shroud:
At very high temperature, ‘there was addition to the radioactive
content of the linen, partly due to evaporation of remaining proteins
and lipids, and partly due to isotopic exchange. …when the linen
is extremely hot the atoms can easily escape and exchange with similar
atoms in the surrounding air’.
3. Radioactive material from sand or
rock
If the body lay on sand, or if during the Shroud’s 500 year
concealment in the city walls of Edessa, ‘radioactive material
in the rocks could have affected the Shroud. Considerably less than
a 13 per cent increase in radioactive carbon during that time would
have caused the results to be 1260-1390AD instead of 33AD.’
4. Handling without protective gloves
The Shroud would have picked up carbon in its fibres whenever it was
handled, as it was during several expositions over the centuries
5. Smoky atmospheres, candles, candle wax and flaming torches:
All these were present during its several exposures from the middle-ages
onwards: ‘microfungi would have been all over its surface’.
The
textile expert involved in the carbon dating, John Tyrer, stated that
although the surface of the cloth could have been cleaned with the
techniques used for pre-treatment,
‘At fibre molecular level, the problem of contaminants presents
specific difficulties… organic molecules containing carbon would
become part of the flax fibre chemistry and would be impossible to
remove by surface actants and ultrasonic cleaning treatments’.
Disrepute
of Carbon-Dating
The AMS method has been quietly gaining disrepute in the scientific
world in the years since it was used on the Shroud, as has carbon
dating in general.
Scientists express doubts about
carbon-dating:
Dr. Eugenia Nitowski, Archaeologist:
‘In any form of scientific
discipline, it is the weight of evidence which must be considered
conclusive. In archaeology, if there are ten lines of evidence –
carbon dating being one of them – and it conflicts with the
other nine, there is little hesitation to throw out the carbon date
as inaccurate due to unforeseen contamination’ (British Society
for the Turin Shroud, Newsletter No.21, Jan/Feb.1989).
11-Jun-97 -- EWTN News Brief
"SCIENTIST SAYS SHROUD OF TURIN IS MUCH OLDER THAN BELIEVED
TURIN, Italy (CWN) - An American scientist said on Tuesday that
the Shroud of Turn is much older than has been recently stated and
is not a painting or other manufactured work.
Professor
Alan Adler, who was attending a news conference announcing new conservation
measures for the shroud, said the cloth is older than the 14th century
date most recently attached to it. The cloth has historically been
named as the burial shroud of Jesus Christ and bears a mysterious
image of a crucified man. "The marks on the shroud are of exuded
blood, belonging to a man who was tortured and crucified,"
he added. "It cannot be from the 14th century, but is much
older and far more consistent with what we know of the crucifixion
of Christ."
Adler
said the Shroud could be the same age as another shroud, in Oviedo,
Spain, that has been carbon-dated to the 7th century. The accuracy
of the carbon-dating tests have been disputed by many scientific
experts.
Tuesday's
news conference was called to discuss new conservation measures
to preserve the shroud. The cloth has been kept furled on a wooden
roller in a silver case, but scientists recommend that it be kept
unrolled in a receptacle containing an inert gas to prevent further
discolouring and deterioration. Until recently, the shroud was kept
in a Turin cathedral that was devastated by fire on April 12. After
it was rescued through the heroic efforts of firemen, the cloth
was moved to a secret location.”
The
following article appeared in the 'Oxford
Star' of 11th April 1991. It relates to the very laboratory
in Oxford where the Shroud was tested:
“boffins
from Oxford University dropped a clanger when asked to date ancient
rock-paintings by South African bushmen. Their carbon-dating tests
estimated the paintings to be 1,200 years old, but they were dumb-founded
when grandma Joan Ahrens said she painted them just 11 years ago!
The
rock shock started when a schoolboy in South Africa came across
the paintings, and his Art teacher called in Natal Museum. They
in turn sent the rocks to Oxford University’s AMS unit –
which found the Turin Shroud was a fake – and their results
confirmed that the rocks were the first bushmen-painted rock.
Then 72 year old Mrs Ahrens saw the articles, and revealed she had
painted them in art classes. They had been stolen by vandals and
thrown into the bush.”