Shroud of Turin: New Evidence 1/5
Noah's Dove
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Bg9wxYpmv0&feature=related
leading scientist and spokesman against the authenticity of the Turin
Shroud has now concluded it to be the burial linen of Jesus Christ.
In 1988, Ray Rogers was at the forefront of the carbon dating of the
relic depicting a Christ-like image. The conclusion of the Carbon-14
test was that the Shroud was a medieval hoax. Now, almost from beyond
the grave, Rogers has admitted the Shroud is far older than results
suggested - and could be the genuine article as many Christians claim.
Ray was a director of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STRP) that
concluded the fourteen foot-long linen cloth was a fake. But when new
evidence revealed the study was flawed, the leading skeptic was forced
to change his mind. Ray, an expert chemist from the Los Alamos
National Laboratory in New Mexico, said the 1988 tests were invalid
because they were done on a repaired section of the Shroud rather than
the original linen.
Sadly, Rogers died of cancer at age 78 in March 2005.
But shortly before his death, Rogers recorded video detailing
explosive conclusions which are broadcasted for the first time in this
revealing documentary. In the short film, gravely ill Ray says: "I
don't believe in miracles that defy the laws of nature. After the 1988
investigation, Id given up on the Shroud, but now I am coming to the
conclusion that it has a very good chance of being the piece of cloth
that was used to bury the historic Jesus."
The Shroud of Turin was virtually unknown until it was photographed on
display in the city's cathedral in 1898. Photographer Secondo Pia was
so shocked by the eerie image revealed in the picture, he later
exclaimed: My God, I was looking into the face of the Lord. Details of
the Shrouds history before the 1898 showing are scant.
It wasn't until 1978 that scientists from the STRP successfully
lobbied the Catholic Church to begin examining the relic. STRP member
Joseph Accetta recalls: "The biggest problem has always been access to
the cloth itself. The Church took a relatively enlightened view of the
shroud. They have a lot of folks who believe it is the shroud of
Christ and don't want anyone meddling with it. But if they didn't have
anyone looking at it, they'd never know the truth."
For five days, the Shroud was subjected to a variety of nondestructive
tests, including the lifting of microscopic fibers. On areas where the
figure appeared to have bled, the scientists found the chemical
signature of blood. Using special UV photography they also detected
serum stains, which are typically found around dried blood clots.
STRP photographer Barrie Schwortz and his colleagues were impressed.
He said: "No medieval artist could have anticipated the invention of
ultra-violet photography and decided to hide a serum stain for us to
discover 700 years later. But we still didn't know if this was the
shroud of Jesus Christ."
It was ten years before the STRP persuaded the Catholic Church to
allow the cloth to be carbon dated as this required a sample from the
Shroud to be burned. A small section was cut from the corner and
divided between laboratories at Oxford University, the University of
Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. The
institutions worked in isolation, and each concluded the Shroud didn't
hail from Biblical times. Carbon dating suggested it was from between
1260 - 1390. The explosive news again made headlines, but many
enthusiasts refused to believe the relic was a fake.
Among those rejecting the Carbon-14 results were amateur scientists
Sue Benford and Joe Marino from Ohio. They suspected the 1988 sample
was from a damaged area of the linen Shroud which had been repaired
with 16th century cotton, thus skewing the results. When their theory
reached Ray Rogers, he was furious. He said: "Id read these things by
people from the lunatic fringe explaining why the date was wrong. I
was irritated and determined to prove Sue and Joe wrong."
Ray had stored microscopic Shroud fibers from the original 1978 probe.
Luckily they were lifted from the same area as the carbon dating
sample. After examining the fibers expecting them to consist entirely
of linen, Ray was dumbfounded. Cotton was present too. He says: "The
cotton fibers were fairly heavily coated with dye, suggesting they
were changed to match the linen during a repair. I concluded that area
of the Shroud was manipulated by someone with great skill. Sue and Joe
were right. The worst possible sample for carbon dating was taken. It
consisted of different materials than were used in the Shroud itself,
so the age we produced WAS inaccurate."
In video footage before his death, seen here in "The Turin Shroud: New
Evidence", Rogers was convinced of the Shrouds authenticity. Close to
death, he said: "I came very close to proving the Shroud was used to
bury the historic Jesus."