Carbon dating shroud error repair mating and dating practices
But science is first and foremost a not a machine, far less a perfect machine.
Scientists themselves are humans, capable of mistakes, prone to cognitive biases, and subject to all the temptations the rest of us mere mortals face.
The “medieval forgery” theory requires a plausible explanation of its creation that fits all the key characteristics of the Shroud image.
In particular, such an explanation would have to show how the forger dehydrated and conjugated the cellulose structure of in the image areas of the Shroud, using only tools available in the thirteenth or fourteenth century.
To date, none of the attempts to reverse-engineer the presumed forger’s technique have succeeded—the parameters are too specific.His technique was so specific that, despite his being limited to High Middle Ages technology, every attempt to reproduce the method has failed or omitted at least one key characteristic.Furthermore, this monstrously clever person left no other clue to his existence except an allusion in the draft of a bishop’s letter. Perhaps an extraterrestrial mischief-maker was pranking us.The 1988 radiocarbon dating was a skeptical “Hail Mary” pass that the receiver fumbled at the goal line (partially due to defensive interference).But even had the “Turin protocol” been followed to the letter, it isn’t clear the tests would necessarily have led to an accurate result.