Dear friends,
Carbon dating techniques are, like any other human activity, subject toi
error. Carbon dating pourous materials such as the mortar in the Newport
Twoer is a complete waste of time, as shown by the results, as the mortar is
pourous and allows a constant interchange between atmospheric carbon ( which
includes a proportion of the radio-active isotope) and the molecular
structure of the mortar. Thus the range of dates given by such a test are
highly unreliable as was shown by the various experts who commented
adversely upon those very tests.
Carbon dating paper or cloth, however, is a far more precise proceedure -
providing one ensures that the paper or cloth is not contaminated by any
micro-biological growth. Since the carbon dating of the Turin Shroud,
knowledge and techniques have improved considerably and carbon dating a
document would clearly establish an accurate range of dates for the
manufacture of the paper. Appropriate analysis of the ink, would give a
clear indication of the date in which the document was written. As with
analysis of paintings, in cases of alleged forgery, the dtae of manufacture
of the paper may well be far earlier than the dtae it was wr5itten upon as
it is not unknown for forgers of some ingenuity to use suitably old
materials, paper, vellum or canvas, on which to concoct their forgery.
Howver, I am sure that such examination of the so-called Charter of
TRansmission of Larmenius would bring us all far closer to the truth than
merely participating in a debate in which a large number of protagonists
have such a vested ineterest in the outcome. Or, am I wrong? Do people
really want the truth? Or, do they prefer the fantasists and fraudsters to
mask our true heritage in a miasma of myth and make-believe?
Best wishes
Tim