|
National Institute of Standards and Technology peer-reviewed paper
. . . in referece to the wikipedia text,
chemical properties of the sample site
In early 2004, the Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology published an important paper by Lloyd A. Currie. Currie, a highly regarded specialist in the field of carbon 14 dating and an NIST Fellow Emeritus, cited the work of Rogers and Arnoldi. He found it credible.
Currie’s NIST paper, just as Rogers’ paper had done, set aside any argument that radiocarbon labs had done anything wrong in dating the Shroud of Turin. Currie also debunked the other so-called theories of scorching effects or the contamination caused by a bioplastic polymer. Significantly, Currie acknowledged that discreet mending was a viable explanation.
Currie’s paper also raised an important issue of blame. According to Currie, the original sampling protocol, requiring multiple samples from different locations on the cloth, was clearly violated by the Papal Custodians of the shroud. Had the protocol been followed the chemical differences would have been obvious to the labs in 1988.
Return to the expanded analysis of this subject:
chemical properties of the sample site
| 
