Dear Russ and all, you have posed a very good question that I wish to extend to other Relics of Christ. And I want to remember that the truth is not in the middle when treating Objects related to God.
From the counting of the C14 atoms in physical objects, the labs PROPOSED the dates of some Relics of Christ. I know the following dates ASSIGNED to the relative objects reported below at 95% confidence level:
- Turin Shroud: 1260-1390, mean 1353 A D;
- Titulus Crucis: 980-1150, mean 1065 A D;
- Tunique of Argenteuil: 530-650 and 670-880, means 590 and 775 A D;
- Oviedo Sudarion: 653-786 and 642-869, means 720 and 755 A D.
I want to underline that the labs implicitly PROPOSED the dates (even if perhaps they did not admit it) but they did not determine the dates because in all the mentioned cases the radiocarbon method did not satisfy one postulate posed by Libby (the inventor of the method): all the environmental factors MUST be known from the birth of the living being that composed the object under analysis.
I don’t know of other objects related to Jesus Christ that were dated using C14. On the basis of these data, the following conclusion can be reached. There are two different possibilities that have to be scientifically evaluated.
-A. All the known Relics of Christ are false and they were made in a period between about 700 AD and 1300 AD. The millions of Christian believers that from centuries did venerate and still venerate these object were so stupid and dupe to believe in the words of some forger that, with the aid of the Christian Catholic Church presented as true false Relics. The Christian Catholic Church used and uses the popular credulity for its purposes allowing public Exhibitions of these false objects. In conclusion it’s all a swindle (but a swindle not yet explainable by Science).
Corollary: how much stupid are the SSG Members that discuss from 2002 problems related to a big fake?
-B. All the four tested Relics of Christ are not false but the relative radiocarbon results are false because they did not take into account for some environmental factor that changed the percentage of C14 in the matter posed in concomitance of the Body of Jesus Christ.
A scientific proof is the fact that ALL the scientific results relative to the TS but the radiocarbon dating are in agreement with the hypothesis that the TS enveloped the Body of the Resurrected.
The radiocarbon results are the scientific independent proof that "something" not yet well detected by science surrounds particular human bodies like Jesus Christ but not only Him. The problem is now to detect and quantify this "something". And some suggestion can be taken from some results (not yet still detected and quantified in a sufficient form) measured at Medjugorje during some apparition of the Mother of God.
Corollary: the radiocarbon dating method can be the mean that will scientifically test the presence of some supernatural factor.
Without any doubt I opt for Point "B". At least this is my way of thinking.
Giulio is a good friend but that doesn’t mean we agree. If the shroud and the sudarium can be connected – and I think they can – then we might have some explaining to do. But, aren’t there already identified issues with each of these tests. What do you think?