Shroud of turin carbon 14 dating
However, no plausible explanation has been offered for the source of the radiation.
Now Carpinteri’s team have hypothesized that high-frequency pressure waves generated in the Earth’s crust during earthquakes are the source of such neutron emissions.
Last year scientists at the University of Padua in northern Italy dated it to between 300BC and AD400 – still hundreds of years after Christ, who is believed to have died between 30-36AD.
Other scientists have previously suggested that neutron radiation may have been responsible for the ghostly image of a crucified man with his arms crossed.
The difficulty is that the numbers don't seem to stack up correctly, and a theory that explains away the measured radiocarbon age of the Shroud has to have a quantitative basis since it basically is claiming that a number (the age) derived from an experiment is somehow wrong.
Let's start by noting that an organism growing on, and feeding on, the linen threads exclusively will simply re-shuffle the available carbon with no effect on the radiocarbon content.
But there is no way you can combine a material with an age of 1000 years with another of 2000 years and get 600 years. The radiocarbon content of the atmosphere from around 1960 to the present is the highest it has ever been due to the atmospheric nuclear weapons testing in the 50s to the 70s, so the potential for contamination is correspondingly greater.
The new theory is published in the journal Meccanica.
Anyone who still believes that C14 dating has proven the Shroud to be medieval should be quickly disabused of that notion.
See the most recent report by Garza Valdes re-printed on "bio- plastic coating" he found on Shroud fibers, in sufficient quantity to throw the date WAY off.
This article is compiled from a series of postings that appeared on the Shroud Newsgroup, alt.turin-shroud.
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.
This organic material would of course be younger than the linen itself and would not have been removed in pretreatment.