John Long has been a Maryland Parole and Probation Agent for 35 years.He has a 30 year interest in the Shroud and is past president of the Holy Shroud Task Force, a professional group devoted to research and education on the Shroud of Turin.Because this seam ran diagonally through the C-14 sample, each lab received either more or less of the patch and original Shroud textile, explaining the labs’ divergent dates and Chi Square test failure.
He also was weary of Christians involved in Shroud science, believing that they were prone to want to see “miracles” where science could find natural explanations.In this image, Pope Francis prays in front of the Holy Shroud, the 14 foot-long linen revered by some as the burial cloth of Jesus.The pope's predecessor, Benedict XVI, has described the cloth as an icon 'written with the blood' of a crucified man The researchers in the latest study describe him as a man 'who suffered physical trauma in a manner consistent with crucifixion after being beaten, scourged and crowned with thorns.' Scroll left to see an X-ray image of the face, believed to be that of Jesus by some, imprinted in the shroud of Turin The linen cloth, believed by some to have wrapped the body of Jesus Christ, has captivated the imagination of historians, church chiefs, sceptics and Catholics for more than 500 years.By sequencing genes from pollen and dust particles on the shroud, researchers have been able to map the type plants and people that came in to contact with the linen.Their research suggests the shroud travelled the world extensively, moving from Jerusalem to Turkey to France before ending up in its in Turin, Italy 'Here we report the main findings from the analysis of genomic DNA extracted from dust particles vacuumed from parts of the body image and the lateral edge used for radiocarbon dating,' Dr Gianni Barcaccia, a plant genetics professor at the University of Padova wrote.With “95% confidence,” the three C-14 labs concluded that the cloth was manufactured between 12, over a thousand years too late to have been Christ’s burial shroud (Damon, 194).However, those who had followed closely Shroud research in the 20th century realized there were too many reasons from science, history, art history and medicine to accept those results at face value.Skeptical as many were of the 1988 C-14 results, Marino and co-researcher M. From pictures of the C-14 samples they found differences in thread size and weave patterns.Sue Benford noticed how some experts had warned that the area selected for the 1988 C-14 sample showed signs of textile repair. The simplest explanation why the date may be off is that it’s rewoven cloth there. They showed C-14 sample pictures to three textile companies in blind tests and were told that one side was different from the other, “touched up to prevent unraveling” and “it is definitely a patch” (Marino and Benford, 2000:7).The scientist who actually cut the 8 square centimeter sample remarked that he had to remove 1 cm of material from it due to fibers of an origin different from the Shroud (Marino and Benford, 2000:2). Alan Adler produced a peer reviewed paper in 1996 demonstrating that the area adjacent to the C-14 sample had significantly different chemical characteristics from the rest of the cloth (Adler, 1996). The two researchers also noticed that radiographs of the Shroud changed as they approached the sample area, indicating different chemical/physical characteristics.He also complained in an earlier interview: You have no way of knowing if the area you took the C-14 sample from represents the whole cloth. Finally, they identified a seam running through the sample apparently dividing the original Shroud material from what they believed to be a 16th century patch.