August 21, 2019


It is the glory of God to conceal the word, and the glory of kings to search out the speech.” (Prov25:2)

“And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying:”
[2 Thessalonians 2:10]

Turin, Piedmont, Italy, is well known for its extraordinary relic of the Holy Winding-Sheet or Shroud. Whatever may be said against its authenticity, it is an astonishing relic, for the impression which it bears in negative of the body of Jesus Christ could with difficulty have been added by art. The face thereon impressed agrees remarkably with the traditional portraits of Christ. Naturally the exposition of the sacred relic are the occasions of numerous pilgrimages (Thurston in “The Month”, January, 1903, 17 February, 162).

The City View:

Science that sent a man to the moon, hasn’t been able to date a Holy Catholic Relic, ”the Holy Shroud.” Waiting until 1988, science shrouded in mystery of a Carbon 14 dating, tested 3 pieces of linen held in a Catholic church in Turin, Italy, for several centuries . (This Turin linen, legend dates to the crusades.) This Shroud is said to have survived 2 fires (one attempt in 1532?, no less?) And now a faulty Carbon14 test. Miraculous in survival already. But the Church of Truth, as miraculously never pronounced the Shrouds authenticity.

One must ask, why does an 8 century old [only from 1200 -1300 AD according to the 1988 British state of the art Carbon 14 test, of a burial linen, with blood filled stains ] require its testing source data to be so closely guarded? Kept secret for 30 years? Although “Carbon14 scientists were pleased with their conclusion, it created more unanswered questions!, left to speculation. Sure the linen Hebrew weave pattern dates to the era of Jesus. Why is this so special, to be used in the 13th century! Not satisfactorily explained . Then science found biological evidence embedded; verifiable pollen agents, of several plants only indigenous to the Jerusalem, Judea, and Dead Sea, area. But,that doesn’t send it back to 33AD only to Jerusalem! What of this “negative imaging technique,” history records the first to be made permanent, by Joseph Nicéphore Niépce, in 1826.” This remains unexplained, how the13th century artist em-pressed a negative image on this linen,” to create a priceless artifact, theoretically from the Holy Land, or Europe? Quite a masterpiece for any artist even in the 19th century, we should have heard from him again, one would think? Yet another unexplained fact from the scientific community, how the stain and color imagery, is limited to just the smallest fraction of each inside layer and does NOT seep throughout the linen cloth as does the blood. This factoid, is just swept under most debunked rugs, hoping no one notices the ineptness of modern science, to explain or replicate! (Oh say, 800 to 2000 years later)? Yes, then there is the blood, all agree on the blood type as AB, while this matches other claimed relics of Jesus, but our science is uncertain if the blood is homo-sapien? Many accept this scientific claim, while no one disputes the imaging is clearly a crucified humanoid figure who was here on planet earth! Another, quiet weakness in the British Carbon 14 scientific quivers? So for 30 years, this renowned science authentication, “the Catholic Shroud a fraud”, due to the infallible Carbon14 dating test. All the unexplained science loose ends became “moot” with this “scientific proof.” The Scientific community claims the shroud a forgery, of the 13th century, while secretly protecting their actual source data, for this stunning conclusion, and leaving more unanswered questions than resolved…. Until now!.

“What profit is there in my blood, whilst I go down to corruption? Shall dust confess to thee, or declare thy truth?” [ Psalms 29:10]

The Holy Shroud may not date back to the Middle Ages May 25, 2019

New evidence has reopened the debate on radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud

For more than 29 years, every request for the release of the raw data from the three laboratories that performed the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin in 1988 was declined. Then, in 2017, French Shroud researcher Tristan Casabianca used the Freedom of Information Act in the United Kingdom that compelled the British Museum to finally release the long awaited data. The British Museum had acted as the formal supervisor of the three laboratories (Oxford, Zurich and Arizona) during the process and apparently, maintained the archive of all the data. Tristan, working with Emanuela Marinelli, Giuseppe Pernagallo and Benedetto Torrisi, have now completed the first analysis of that raw data and, on 22 March 2019, published a paper titled, Radiocarbon Dating of the Turin Shroud: New Evidence From Raw Data, in the peer reviewed journal Archaeometry. Perhaps the greatest irony here is that the journal Archaeometry itself is published by Oxford! Here is the abstract:

In 1988, three laboratories performed a radiocarbon analysis of the Turin Shroud. The results, which were centralized by the British Museum and published in Nature in 1989, provided ‘conclusive evidence’ of the medieval origin of the artifact. However, the raw data were never released by the institutions. In 2017, in response to a legal request, all raw data kept by the British Museum were made accessible. A statistical analysis of the Nature article and the raw data strongly suggests that homogeneity is lacking in the data and that the procedure should be reconsidered.”

“Inquire carefully and diligently, the truth of the thing by looking well into it, and if thou find that which is said to be certain, and that this abomination hath been really committed,” [Deuteronomy 13:14]

Needless to say, the arrival of this paper has been long awaited by Shroud scholars around the world since it provides the first real look at what is essentially, brand new data (the first in almost 30 years). Unfortunately, the paper itself is currently behind a pay wall which might make it difficult for many to read it so I am quoting the last few sentences here:

“The statistical analyses, supported by the foreign material found by the laboratories, show the necessity of a new radiocarbon dating to compute a new reliable interval. This new test requires, in an interdisciplinary research, a robust protocol. Without this re-analysis, it is not possible to affirm that the 1988 radiocarbon dating offers ‘conclusive evidence’ that the calendar age range is accurate and representative of the whole cloth.”

“For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed: nor hidden, that shall not be known.”[Luke 12:2]

I think an excellent assessment of the paper’s importance was clearly stated in a private correspondence from Prof. Bruno Barberis recently:

“The results shown in the article published in Archaeometry represent an important step forward since it was finally possible to examine the raw data obtained from the three laboratories and better understand the anomalies and errors made in the dating operation.”

“For behold thou hast loved truth: the uncertain and hidden things of thy wisdom thou hast made manifest to me.” [Psalms 50:8]

On May 17, 2019, Tristan wrote to let us know that “on Thursday, 23 May, a conference will take place at the University of Catania. Its title: ‘Dating of the Turin Shroud: it all has to be redone’ (la datazione della sacra sindone, tutto da rifare). It has been organized and will be moderated by Prof. Benedetto Torrisi. The intervenants will be: Prof. Marco Riani, Prof. Paolo di Lazzaro, Dr. Giuseppe Pernagallo, Emanuela Marinelli, Prof. Bruno Barberis and me. The starting point will be our article in Archaeometry.” Here is a link to the University web site for a detailed presentation (in Italian): La datazione della Sacra Sindone: tutto da rifare.

On May 23, 2019, the meeting was successfully held in Catania, news of which generated considerable media attention. We are including links to a number of responses to the paper when it was first published, as well as links to post-conference comments and articles, both from the participants and from the popular press. A special note of thanks to Joe Marino for his important assistance in obtaining English language translations for us.

A study group of the Etnea University, coordinated by professor Benedetto Torrisi, states without fear that, on the dating of the sheet that perhaps wrapped Jesus, it is all to be redone. The conclusion comes after having obtained data that until now was kept secret.


Thirty years after the attribution of the Holy Shroud to the medieval period, a multidisciplinary Etna team led by the statistician

Benedetto Torrisi reaches the opposite conclusion. “It’s all to be redone. There is full certainty that the Shroud does not date back to the Middle Ages,

the lecturer reiterates to Meridio News after a conference at the University of Catania.. “Dating is still possible through new examinations of never analyzed remains”, adds Professor Paolo Di Lazzaro, deputy director ofthe International Center for the Shroud Studies of Turin. Torrisi rewinds the tape: “There are two focal dates in the history of the Shroud:1988 , when the prestigious scientific journal Nature endorsed that it could date back to the years between 1260 and 1390 ;

and 23 May 2019 , the date on which that certainty was publicly overturned in an irrefutable manner »

The professor of the Department of Economics in Etna refers to the scientific publication in the journal Archa-eometry. The borderline between past and present, therefore, lies in the difference between probability and certainty. “The error in the past has been to consider absolute an approximate truth – the statistician continues – considering that the scientific techniques of the time could not have led to an outcome of this magnitude”.

Despite this, the British Museum for years has secreted the analyses carried out by laboratories in Arizona, Oxford and Zurich. “Three tests, it is true,” adds Torrisi, “but all on contaminated Shroud fabrics, which have distorted the results.

The Nature magazine was perhaps also in a hurry to validate, having taken only two months. Today, however, the situation has changed.” Torrisi says that, together with Tristan Casabianca, a Shroud scholar, the team had access to the data that had been kept secret: “And so after more than a year of work we have arrived at a new truth.

[City – It is NOW revealed, that all three labs tested a piece of cloth from the previously “admitted” small sewn section of the shroud, repaired by nunn’s from the fire damage. This is politically correct speech for “a fraud was perpetrated and kept secret for 30 years.] ” there are NO coincidences.” An investigation into these procedures should be demanded!

Has Jesus been waiting a half century for a more accurate less invasive method for dating linens? We can only surmise, why this fraud was permitted to be performed on this relic? However these scientist mention a “ Vibrational spectroscopy” method of dating, (in another article not posted here) a brief is of this science is included below:

“I discover then the truth unto you, and I will not hide the secret from you.”[Tobias (Tobit) 12:11]

Vibrational Spectroscopy Abstract

Volume 67, July 2013, Pages 61-70


The possibility to define a two-way relationship between age and a spectral property of ancient flax textiles has been investigated in the present paper employing both FT-IR and Raman analyses on selected samples dated from about 3250 B.C. To 2000 A.D.

After a first selection to eliminate polluted samples, based on visual inspection, on proper mechanical tests and on a first glance at the resulting spectra, eleven samples of the original 14 have been used for Raman analysis and eight for FT-IR analysis.

For the first time, the possibility to define a correlation among spectral properties and age of flax samples, by using calibration curves, has been proved.

In agreement with the kinetics theoretical model, the experimental relationships are of an exponential type, giving correlation coefficients higher than 0.9. The better results were obtained using FT-IR because Raman analysis needs to consider an additional variable due to the non negligible influence of fluorescence.

Presently, the method allows to assign an uncertainty of centuries to the measured data, but future calibrations based on a greater number of samples (though it is not easy to find ancient samples adequate for the test) and coupled with ad hoc cleaning procedures could significantly improve its accuracy.

For those with faith, no evidence is necessary; for those without it, no evidence will suffice.” Thomas

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error: Content is protected !!