skip to content »

Carbon dating shroud of turin

carbon dating shroud of turin-26

Required reading." Dorothy Crispino, Editor and Publisher, Shroud Spectrum International ..."a very readable and worthwhile book." De La Salle University, Philippines The author Harry E.Gove is a co-inventor of accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) and was responsible for its use in testing the Turin Shroud; he wrote in the "Acknowledgements" of this 1996 book, "The Turin Shroud would not have been carbon dated were it not for the technology of accelerator mass spectrometry...

carbon dating shroud of turin-78carbon dating shroud of turin-24carbon dating shroud of turin-18carbon dating shroud of turin-33

And what better than a piece of historical enigma to use this new discovery on other than the Turin Shroud?Not just one single outlier result has come out of these tests, as Gove seems to be indicating, but as many as four of them (cf. 28, 2A, 1986), plus a number of other unsatisfactory results.Of course, it would have been quite disastrous to reveal the whole truth!I felt no joy in the final result except that it proved the power of AMS to credibly date precious artifacts."Even for those who disagree with the C-14 results, this book will be "must reading" for anyone seriously studying the Shroud. When it was finally carbon dated and sadly proved to be a fake (or is it a fake, even now there are doubts?) I felt immense sadness even though I am not of the Christian faith.(That was simply not true as Meacham very well knew." (Pg.

283-284) He concludes, "the adventure is over---it lasted too long and was filled with too much acrimony.

Also he is scoffing about the alleged statement in that book of there being a chance of 83 millions to One that the Shroud is the genuine shroud of Christ, not comprehending (or not wanting to comprehend) that the calculation alluded to (meant as a rough estimate) does NOT constitute a general probability statement, but applies only in the case of the theoretical eventuality that the Turin Shroud represents a genuine first century crucifixion, which in itself is quite improbable from a purely theoretical point of vue.

What appears most irritating to me is that one cannot even rely on Mr.

Given that it has been written by an academic person, one ought be able to expect from the author some minimal standards of objectivity.

Unfortunately, from almost A to Z this book does not meet the requirements.

What he says about STURP as a group, may be true for some of its members, but even there Gove resorts to exaggeration and distortion.