Maria da Glória of the CENTRO PORTUGUÊS DE SINDONOLOGIA writes:
As a modest Shroud researcher I can’t help comment, Dr Mark Oxley’s post is just brilliant it´s the kind of explanation that summarizes crystal clear all reliable scientific information on the controversy of 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, so there is almost nothing left to add nevertheless I´ll remember one more fact Dr.J. Timothy Jull apparently has neglected.
Let alone all microscopic and chemical aspects the late Dr Raymond Rogers pointed out in his paper, he noticed spliced threads in material from the Raes sample and this finding was later confirmed in a study by Dr Robert Villareal and his team from Los Alamos National Laboratory presented at Ohio Shroud Conference held in Columbus 2008.
Dr Thibault Heimburger by contrast phase micoscopic studies in remaining material from radiocarbon sampling area,also confirmed the presence of threads where dyed cotton fibers were spliced to linen fibers.
I utterly disagree with William, Skeptics Dictionary has nothing worth reading about the Shroud of Turin and Mr. Joe Nickell’s assertions on Shroud matters are always biased by an atheis point of view.
Mr Joe Nickell is not a scientist so he has not the right to criticize from a technical point of view Dr Raymond Rogers’ paper which was published in a peer reviewed scientific journal and Dr.Raymond Rogers was absolutely honest stating that Dr Luigi Gonella provided him the radiocarbon threads.
ost information about the Shroud on so called skeptic websites is completely misleading and nothing but utter bogus.
Dr Mark Oxley’s book «The Callenge of the Shroud» is truly one of the best easy ways to get reliable and updated information on the Shroud of Turin.
Hystorical information provided is fantastic and it was a great pleasure reading this book.
My sincere congratulations to Dr Mark Oxley for his book and his post.
I wish all Shroud of Turin blogger’s a HAPPY NEW YEAR
Maria da Glória
CENTRO PORTUGUÊS DE SINDONOLOGIA