Carbon dating skeptic

This linen was allegedly flash-imprinted with an image of Jesus during his miraculous resurrection, presumably by an intense burst of energy released under such circumstances.

The case for fraud has been strong since the 14th century, but enthusiasts insist on rolling that wheel ’round again.

It was on fibers from “filter H” that Fanti did most of his work.

“I discovered a relatively simple technique to detect which linen fibers were from the shroud,” he said, “based on cross-polarized light used in a petrographic microscope.

According to news reports this week, Italian scientists used an infrared CO laser to scorch images onto cloth and “conducted dozens of hours of tests with X-rays and ultraviolet lights” in an effort to prove that the image could be created by a burst of electromagnetic energy.

(Here’s a PDF of their Italian-language report.) What is the wavelength of a resurrection miracle?

C., give or take 250 years, thus nicely bracketing the year 30, when most historians say Jesus died on the cross.

In response to email questions, Fanti explained that he used a pair of established techniques, infrared light (Fourier Transform Infrared, or FTIR) and Raman spectroscopy, to measure the amount of cellulose in shroud fibers given to him by microanalyst Giovanni Riggi di Numana, a participant in the 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP), as well as the controversial 1988 carbon-dating tests of the shroud.

This is also actually kind of trivial and easily determined in the lab. Let’s see what the Missing Universe Museum thinks are the assumptions of radioactive dating methods. I guess we have to start at the top and work our way down… During an organisms life, it takes in CO have the common 6 protons and 6 neutrons. However, due to some interesting nuclear chemistry (which I’ll go into if requested), there’s another version of carbon (called an isotope) that has 6 protons and 8 neutrons. Note that if the number of protons change, then the atom is no longer carbon. Amazingly (and unlike what is claimed by the creationists), scientists have known about a variety of methods that create carbon-14 and how those methods have varied over time. Well, we take a carbon sample from a material of a known age and date that. Basically, the calibration curves are off by no more than 16 years over the historical range (6,000 years or so) and no more than 163 years over the last 20,000 years.Tune into the Token Skeptic for a slightly more skeptical look at stories in the news, urban legends, good science, pseudoscience, and what makes popular culture pop. It started around a kitchen table, three friends reading out the erotic work of a retired dad – and now it’s a podcasting sensation.Cold-pressed juices, quitting sugar, Paleo, hot yoga, mindfulness … Jamie Morton of "My Dad Wrote A Porno" podcast never expected that “Belinda Blinked” (written by...My interviews are with: Ben Rawlence - his book City of Thorns is about Northern Kenya - the... In 2011, just over a billion dollars was spent on alternative medicines in Australia, many of which come with unproven efficacy claims.After reports on mainstream media in Australia about the efficacy of... In theory the answer is 'yes', but there's a problem: no one seems to know exactly how to do it!(Aside, my dad doesn’t know how old I am, he usually misses by about two years, giving him an error of almost 5%.) Not only, is this not a ‘false assumption’. Oh and here’s a link to the Table of Contents for this set of creationist misconceptions.


Leave a Reply