Carbon 14 Dating of Shroud of Turin flawed.

It has been pointed out to me by sonhouse that the carbon 14 dating of
the Shroud of Turin, believed to be the burial cloth of Christ, has been
determined by scientist to be a mistake. It is reported as the biggest
mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating.

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-history.htm

http://www.skepticalspectacle.com/PapalCustodianvsVatican.htm

is it important to you?. my faith is not made more or less by garments or other pieces, either genuine or fake. i use the cross as a sign of my christianity, but it is made of metal or wood plastic as well. god/ christ is not there just a focus for our minds.

Originally posted by stoker
is it important to you?. my faith is not made more or less by garments or other pieces, either genuine or fake. i use the cross as a sign of my christianity, but it is made of metal or wood plastic as well. god/ christ is not there just a focus for our minds.

Yes, I am interested in announcing the truth of Jesus. Now we know.
Who else, but Jesus, can rightly claim to be the way, the truth, and the life?

Originally posted by RJHinds
It has been pointed out to me by sonhouse that the carbon 14 dating of
the Shroud of Turin, believed to be the burial cloth of Christ, has been
determined by scientist to be a mistake. It is reported as the biggest
mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating.

http://www.factsplusfacts.com/carbon-14-history.htm

http://www.skepticalspectacle.com/PapalCustodianvsVatican.htm

You still have no problem with the idea there were mistakes made but there is still no proof it was used on Jesus. Now that they think the data was in error and the date is a lot closer to Jesus' time, you now think carbon dating is ok? It looks like the Vatican has screwed up any hope for finding an accurate date for the cloth anyway so it is just back to belief and faith. If the cloth was dated to 2000 years old, I am sure you would now think carbon dating to be totally a great science.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You still have no problem with the idea there were mistakes made but there is still no proof it was used on Jesus. Now that they think the data was in error and the date is a lot closer to Jesus' time, you now think carbon dating is ok? It looks like the Vatican has screwed up any hope for finding an accurate date for the cloth anyway so it is just back to ...[text shortened]... d to 2000 years old, I am sure you would now think carbon dating to be totally a great science.

I still believe that more work needs to be done to refine the dating
process to make sure it is accurate in all cases. I still don't trust
carbon 14 dating at this time.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I still believe that more work needs to be done to refine the dating
process to make sure it is accurate in all cases. I still don't trust
carbon 14 dating at this time.

You just confirmed my hypothesis. You have no problem say, with LED lighting technology because it probably will never impinge on your religious dogma. Or say, X-ray science, unless it starts to weigh in on the dates of human fossils. Or physics, lets see, unless it starts to support carbon 14 dating. Oh yes, I forgot, it ALREADY supports C14 dating. So now physics is suspect.

Originally posted by sonhouse
You just confirmed my hypothesis. You have no problem say, with LED lighting technology because it probably will never impinge on your religious dogma. Or say, X-ray science, unless it starts to weigh in on the dates of human fossils. Or physics, lets see, unless it starts to support carbon 14 dating. Oh yes, I forgot, it ALREADY supports C14 dating. So now physics is suspect.

Theories should be proven by constant testing before they are accepted as
fact. I don't accept the theory of evolution as a fact because it has not
been proven. Practically all the circumstantial evidence gathered to support
it could just as easily support creationism.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Yes, I am interested in announcing the truth of Jesus.

And you need an old rag in order to do this?

Originally posted by Soothfast
And you need an old rag in order to do this?

I don't know why I am laughing so hard at what you wrote. It just
sounds funny even though I don't know what you mean.

Originally posted by stoker
is it important to you?. my faith is not made more or less by garments or other pieces, either genuine or fake. i use the cross as a sign of my christianity, but it is made of metal or wood plastic as well. god/ christ is not there just a focus for our minds.

Have you read the book The Shroud of Turin? Or the sequel?

Originally posted by josephw
Have you read the book The Shroud of Turin? Or the sequel?

Which book is that? what author? A Chemists perspective on the shroud by Ramond N Rogers? Vindication for the shroud by two non-believers by Andre Cherpollod and Serge Mouraviev? The Blood and the Shroud by Ian Wilson? The Botany of the Shroud by Avinoam Danin? The challenge of the Shroud by Mark Oxley?
The crucifixion of Jesus by Fredrick T Zugibe? A Doctor of Calvary by Dr Pierre Barbet?

Judgement day for the Shroud by Walter McCrone?

Not sure which version you are talking about. That was just a short list.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Which book is that? what author? A Chemists perspective on the shroud by Ramond N Rogers? Vindication for the shroud by two non-believers by Andre Cherpollod and Serge Mouraviev? The Blood and the Shroud by Ian Wilson? The Botany of the Shroud by Avinoam Danin? The challenge of the Shroud by Mark Oxley?
The crucifixion of Jesus by Fredrick T Zugibe? A Doct ...[text shortened]... by Walter McCrone?

Not sure which version you are talking about. That was just a short list.

I think he is referring to "The Shroud of Turin" by Wayne Wright, Dated
September 2010.

http://www.sharethewordmin.com/EvidenceResurection.html

Originally posted by RJHinds
I think he is referring to "The Shroud of Turin" by Wayne Wright, Dated
September 2010.

http://www.sharethewordmin.com/EvidenceResurection.html

I see the last part of the says 'evidenceResurection' How does the shroud say anything about that? It seems to me it would take a lot more than three days being covered in a shroud to produce the kind of image shown on the shroud. What has the shroud do do with resurrection? btw, there are 3 r's in resurrection. Is your spelling a typo?

Do you accept science or not, RJHinds? If not, why is this different?

A interesting program about the shroud was on the History channel recently.

http://www.history.com/shows/the-real-face-of-jesus