Carbon dating and the turin shroud
We'll keep monitoring the moderation folder, so any of your posts that go into moderation shouldn't be there long. It has to be lengthy in order to address such a complicated subject in the depth I intend. was more accurate, and he would sometimes correct the 1000 A. figure, whereas other times he'd let it pass without comment. Sometimes, disputes over what actually happened will go on for years, generations, or even centuries.
I can name some of the sources for my information below, but there are other sources I can't name for various reasons. In this case, there are some factors involved that help explain how poorly the story has been preserved.
Though not naming a source diminishes the significance of a claim, I think some of the information involved is valuable enough to warrant reporting it without being able to name the source. For example, it was an unofficial test, done privately, apparently with only a small number of people involved, with ambiguous and confusing results, results that conflict with later testing, pertaining to a highly controversial issue.
I know who the sources are and judge them credible enough for their claims to be taken seriously. It's understandable that accounts of what happened would be somewhat garbled. We're not talking about an event that had no eyewitnesses or an event that happened hundreds or thousands of years ago.
- Benford made some misleading claims about the 1988 tape of Adler, and she claimed to have had an unlikely telephone conversation with Rossman.
Has Rossman similarly been misleading or made unlikely claims in a relevant context? I see no way to deny that Rossman has more credibility.
While people sometimes do things that had seemed unlikely, and the scenario Benford described might have occurred, we're being asked to accept a sequence of events that's improbable upfront.
For a few decades, accounts have been circulating about alleged dating work done on a piece of the Shroud of Turin in the early 1980s.
Unfortunately, the accounts have been largely unsubstantiated, vague, and inconsistent.
I intend to keep updating this thread as more information comes to light. The differences among these accounts weaken the accounts' credibility.
If you think anything should be added or changed, you can leave a comment here or send me an email. date for the other end led to a garbled memory of 1200 A. Whatever the case, it's easy to think of ways in which these numbers could get garbled over time. But just as we don't want to underestimate the differences, we also don't want to overestimate them.