But we know the Shroud is a fake for several reasons.Carbon dating of the linen cloth (in three separate labs) has placed its manufacture between 12, which (if you know dating) is the time at which the flax plants furnishing the cloth would have been harvested, no longer absorbing carbon from the atmosphere.by Helen Fryman Question: What about radiocarbon dating? Response: I asked several people who know about this field. (1.) C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4,000 years ago.This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age.Further, an Italian scientist managed to reproduce the Shroud by using materials that would have been available during the Middle Ages.The other reasons for fakery (not fraudulence, as it apparently wasn’t designed to deceive people) are given in a very nice article by the historian Charles Freeman that just appeared in “Circumstantial evidence also comes from the nature of the weave.The result overturned 10 years of hope among Christians that it was real, after the first scientific tests found evidence of blood and serum stains.
Some believe trees are known to be as old as 9,000 years. A lot of people doubt this claim for various good reasons I wont go into here.The truth is that there is no known way to reproduce the image.The old article notes that there is also no surefire way to prove it bears the image of Christ, but it could.We know this because there are a fair number of paintings from centuries ago showing what it looked like.The degradation is due to its repeated unfurling and exhibition, which would crack and flake the paint, in addition to the fact (revealed in the article I’ll cite in a second) that in past times it was customary for supplicants to hurl their rosaries at the shroud and then recover them.