Yes, it has been dated to the same time period as the shroud and both have
now released their hold on botanical evidence indicating they were in
Jerusalem around the time of Christ's death. Pollen on both pieces of cloth
match and also match particular plant species that grow only near Jerusalem.
As to the C14 dating that was mentioned in the other reply post...
I used to be a member of the Archaeology List before I switched jobs. I
asked several of the C14 experts if a large radiation burst, such as one
that probably would need to be released to reanimate a body, would destroy
the usefulness of C14. I asked this because C14 is a radioactive element.
It is the breakdown of one type of carbon (C13 I think) into another. It
happens in all carbon-bearing matter. By measuring the rate of the
breakdown the researcher gets a range date (i.e. 4,000 +/- 250 years).
I have heard that in New Mexico, because of the A-bomb tests C14 cannot be
performed reliably. I am of the opinion that if it destroys a date there
then a similar event could destroy a date somewhere else. All I wanted to
know was whether the dates became older or younger. I could not get an
answer from anyone because they thought I was debating the validity of the
shroud and the existence of God.
I know God exists. I wanted information on a theory. I never got it but I
still think it is a good theory. Any nuclear physicists out there?
Darwin
>From: "Gerry Sinclair" <g.jsinclair@dlcwest.com>
>Reply-To: sinclair@mids.org
>To: <sinclair@mids.org>
>Subject: Re: Shroud
>Date: Fri, 10 Sep 1999 05:35:18 -0600
>
>Is there not a cloth that is purported to be the one that was wrapped
>around
>our Lord's head, housed in a church in Spain. I don't recall the name of
>the
>town, but I believe it is Oveida or something similar.
>
>Gerry Sinclair
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Privateers <Privateers@privateers.org>
>To: <sinclair@mids.org>
>Sent: September 10, 1999 1:15 AM
>Subject: Re: Shroud
>
>
> > Dear Tim
> >
> > If we all agree that the carbon dating was flawed and that the test
>proved
> > nothing we are still faced with proving the shroud, an object "worthy
>of
> > veneration" is the burial cloth of our Lord...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html