Richard Dawkins on the Shroud of Turin
Richard Dawkins discusses the Shroud in his latest book, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, (September 22, 2009). Obviously, he is being selective with evidence. Here is what he says:
[Carbon dating] has revolutionized archaeological dating. The most celebrated example is the Shroud of Turin. Since this notorious piece of cloth seems mysteriously to have imprinted on it the image of a bearded crucified man, many people hoped it might hail from the time of Jesus. It turns up in the historical record in the mid-fourteenth century in France, and nobody knows where it was before that. It has been housed in Turin since 1578, under the custody of the Vatican since 1983. When mass spectrometry made it possible to date a tine sample of the shroud, rather than the substantial swathes that would have been needed before, the Vatican allowed a small strip to be cut off. The strip was divided in three parts and sent to three leading laboratories specializing in carbon dating, in Oxford, Arizona and Zurich. Working under conditions of scrupulous independence—not comparing notes—the three laboratories reported their verdicts on the date when the flax from which the cloth had been woven died. Oxford said ad 1200, Arizona 1304 and Zurich 1274. These dates are all—within normal margins of error—compatible with each other and with the date in the 1350s at which the shroud is first mentioned in history. The dating of the shroud remains controversial, but not for reasons that cast doubt on the carbon-dating technique itself. For example, the carbon in the shroud might have been contaminated by a fire, which is known to have occurred in 1532. I won’t pursue the matter further, because the shroud is of historical, not evolutionary, interest. It is a nice example, however, to illustrate the method, and the fact that, unlike dendrochronology, it is not accurate to the nearest year, only to the nearest century or so.
It is a well written book, and for people who enjoy the subject of evolution, as I do, it is a good read. But, as with theology, he is careless with material he doesn’t understand. Too bad.
Lawrence Gardner in his book “Bloodline Of the Holy Grail’ advises that After Jacques De Moray of the Knights Templar was nailed to the wall as in a crucifiction and when almost dead was taken down and wrapped in the “Shroud of Turin’. Later he and his asst were burned at the stake. The Vatican is well aware of this but choose to milk it.
Bruce Doige
October 31, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Not only he doesn’t know theology, which is not his field: it seems he doesn’t know elementary maths too, despite his studies and the Nobel prize to come. Or is he, more simply, a liar?
The 1989 Nature’s “peer reviewed” (LOL!) article in which the results of the dating were published has a 31 instead of a 17.
Well, that (intentional?) “small error” makes the magic possible and the Shroud becomes a medieval fake, even if with the lowest acceptable confidence level (as I know, even lower that the minimum acceptable, indeed).
Be honest! Make the calculation again! Done? Got that 17? OK, put it where it should be (i.e., where those “scientists” put the 31) and, P-O-O-F!!, radiocarbon dating of the Shroud becomes worthless.
Real scientists should be honest and surrender to evidence. Believe me, that man if everything but a scientist.
Gabriele67
November 7, 2009 at 10:03 am