Scientific study of the Shroud of Turin

[Ninshub]

An interview with the authors of a recent book (the title is self-explanatory).

Dr. John Jackson and his wife Rebecca share their guide to understanding the Shroud of Turin and the evidence surrounding it, \"The Shroud of Turin: A Critical Summary of Observations, Data, and Hypotheses.

Also fairly recent - Mark Antonacci, the author of Test the Shroud - At the Atomic and Molecular Level. This book gets great reviews on Amazon.

Haven't listened to all of it, but starts off well and interestingly, with a bit of background on the subject, and an open-minded but skeptical interviewer.

Hasn't the Shroud of Turin been exposed once and for all as a Medieval forgery (albeit the work of an artistic genius) thanks to rigorous carbon-dating tests carried out in the 1980s?

Or is there more to be said? This week we are joined by attorney and author Mark Antonacci, founder and president of Test the Shroud Foundation, for a discussion on his fascinating book Test the Shroud : At the Atomic and Molecular Levels. Arguing that new scientific tests might contest these findings and reveal the Shroud to be very probably the genuine burial cloth of Jesus Christ, Mark Antonacci proposes a scientifically-testable hypothesis that particle radiation emanating from the shroud-wrapped, crucified body may account for very many of the Shroud's features, such as full-length body images, still-red blood marks, erroneous carbon dating and more. He also describes scientific tests that could be applied to the burial cloth and its human bloodstains that could, he believes, demonstrate whether or not the Shroud was impacted by a miraculous event, when and where it happened, and even the identity of the victim.

Join us as we discuss the issues and debate whether or not his proposals might be fruitful in the ongoing quest to determine the truth about The Shroud of Turin.

I think it's a huge difficulty for the Shroud proponents that the result of carbon dating was entirely consistent with the first mention of the Shroud in the historical record, in medieval France.

To my mind another big stumbling-block is the weave of the cloth. It's a technical field and there seem to be contradictory statements around, but based on what I've read it sounds doubtful whether there is either an example of a herringbone pattern in linen from the time of Christ, or an example of a 3:1 pattern from that time, let alone the two in combination.

And apart from the evidence on those particular points, I just find it unbelievable that the Shroud of Christ - bearing the visible image of Christ on it - would have been preserved intact for more than a millennium without there being so much as a clear written reference to such an incredible relic.

[Ninshub]

I think it's a huge difficulty for the Shroud proponents that the result of carbon dating was entirely consistent with the first mention of the Shroud in the historical record, in medieval France.

To my mind another big stumbling-block is the weave of the cloth. It's a technical field and there seem to be contradictory statements around, but based on what I've read it sounds doubtful whether there is either an example of a herringbone pattern in linen from the time of Christ, or an example of a 3:1 pattern from that time, let alone the two in combination.

And apart from the evidence on those particular points, I just find it unbelievable that the Shroud of Christ - bearing the visible image of Christ on it - would have been preserved intact for more than a millennium without there being so much as a clear written reference to such an incredible relic.

Chris, I'm with you on the last point. But on your first two ones, have you listened to the (admittedly very long) podcast link above? I'm listening to it in bits and pieces as I'm doing other things, but it's difficult for me to keep my attention on it to fully grasp and follow everything that's being said. But I imagine Antonacci must tackle those points? I'm in the second half - if I notice him bringing them up, I'll point it out.

[Ninshub]

From an Amazon reviewer:

I was disappointed that Mr. Antonacci’s findings did not agree with the findings of Joseph Marino in his book, “Wrapped Up In The Shroud”, which chronicles he and his wife’s efforts to prove that the carbon date was actually performed on a rewoven patch. I really wanted to believe that. Fortunately, Mr. Antonacci’s explanation for the erroneous carbon date seem much more plausible to me.

Also this from a website of some sort:

Shroud of Turin updates, 1988 carbon 14 dating of Shroud is invalid, Improper samples tested, Italian scientists: ‘Turin Shroud ‘was created by flash of supernatural light’, Mark Antonnaci book: ‘Test the Shroud At the Atomic and Molecular Levels’

Google also puts up this Skeptiko thread in which you participated, Chris (!), and raises Antonacci:
http://www.skeptiko-forum.com/threads/ca...23/page-10

Again I'll try and keep on the lookout for a mention of that in the podcast.

Yes, I was looking at that old thread last night. I have the book by Antonacci somewhere, waiting to be sent to the charity shop, as I found it impossible. I'll see if I can dig it out.

[Ninshub]

Chris, as I'm listening the topic of the carbon dating just came up. It starts at 1:06:45 and the interviewer introduces the topic a bit like you, saying, facetiously, "all of our conversation is useless because it was established in 1988 that it was a forgery...."

Yes, I was looking at that old thread last night. I have the book by Antonacci somewhere, waiting to be sent to the charity shop, as I found it impossible. I'll see if I can dig it out.

I found it. Actually, Antonacci's comments on the weave of the Shroud are available in a preview on Google Books (pp. 98, 99):
https://books.google.com/books?id=mz_OOVknlBAC&pg=PA98

He argues that it would have been technically possible for the Shroud to have been woven at the time of Christ (I'm not sure whether anyone has argued otherwise). But he doesn't give much evidence of similar linen cloth from that time. He talks about 3:1 twills from Egyptian burials from the second millennium BC (though from previous discussions I think those may have been produced by a different technique from whole cloth). Otherwise the only mention he gives of either a 3:1 example or a herringbone example in linen seems to be a piece from Palmyra, said to be from between the first and third centuries and to have had "the same 3:1 pattern as the Shroud", studied by William Geilmann of the University of Mainz. I'm not sure whether that means a 3:1 herringbone or just 3:1, but in any case the reference he gives is not to Geilmann, but to another book on the Shroud, by Petrosillo and Marinelli.

There's another reference to textiles from Palmyra with "the same structure" as the Shroud, in the collection of Prof. Geilmann at the Roman-German Central Museum, in this online Shroud newsletter:
https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/sn054Aug89.pdf

It all seems a bit vague. Given the lack of textile parallels to the Shroud from Antiquity, I'd have thought this piece of cloth from Palmyra would have been nailed down definitely and then waved in triumph by the sindonologists (metaphorically).

[Ninshub]

Regarding the carbon dating point, this is what he brings up in the interview, if you can make sense of it:

1- Radiation was the encoding agent for the full length body images that are found on the shroud. It can account for all these features.

2- The source of the radiation not only is the body itself but it can only be the body. You cannot have all these features duplicated on the shroud unless the radiation came from the body, which was clearly tortured, crucified and died in the vertical position.

3. The evidence also indicates that radiation is particle radiation (protons and neutrons primarily). The body appears to have disappeared, says the evidence.

EDIT: Then there's more detail about this part... These radioactive chlorine and calcium atoms can only be created by neutrons. However brilliant a medieval forger could have been, he could not have even had access to neutron radiation until the 20th century.

This starts at around 1h12 min.

I couldn't make much sense of the book when I tried to read it. The author is a lawyer, not a physicist, if I understand correctly.

For what it's worth, I think the shroud is genuine. The piece that was removed for carbon dating had cotton in it which meant it had been repaired around 800 hundred years ago. (can't remember exactly) I do remember we discussed this some time ago so I don't want to argue with anyone about it.