1. Questions about the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin
Paolo Di Lazzaro
ENEA, Chief of Research
Vice director of the International Centre of Sindonology
General Meeting of the International Centre of Sindonology
Chambéry, 5 May 2018

2. Carbon dating the Shroud of Turin, a troubled decision
In 1984 STuRP finished a follow-on test protocol, and gave Turin a list of 26 tests. #6 Carbon Dating.
In 1986 after 2 years of political maneuvering, a meeting was held to plan radiocarbon dating, the only test accepted. The plan specified seven labs but only a single sample to be divided.
In 1988 the long sought Carbon dating was accomplished. The single sample was taken adjacent to the Raes sample of 1973, arguably one of the most contaminated places on the Shroud. This sample was divided among the three AMS labs (Oxford, Zurich and Tucson in Arizona) under the supervision of the British Museum.

3. Shroud sampling, 21 April, 1988

4. Shroud sampling, 21 April, 1988

5. 13 October, 1988. Press conference
Prof. Edward Hall Dr. Michael Tite Dr. Robert Hedges
Scientists marked their finding with an exclamation point as if this was to be the last word. A certain degree of hubris?

6. Immediate, worldwide echo
Most scientists just shrugged and accepted the date.
Support and interest in Shroud research declined.

7. Results are published in Nature, on Feb. 1989
Conclusive? Science is a relay race…

8. It is difficult dating textiles even by today’s technology

10. All stays quiet for 22 years, until 6th May 2010 in Frascati…
Prof. Riani talking at the workshop IWSAI, Frascati, 2010

11. Robust statistical analysis
Results: 1) statistical evidence that Arizona only analysed A1. 2) there is a significant trend of the age along the longitudinal coordinates.

13. December 2010, seven months after the Riani’s talk at Frascati

14. December 2010, seven months after the Riani’s talk at Frascati

15. Ut breviter dicam
The age of the linen of the Shroud of Turin is uncertain, because the 1988 radiodatation provides heterogeneous results, probably due to a contaminant that was not removed during the cleaning procedures prior to the AMS measurements.
The robust methods of statistical analysis by Riani et al., made possible by the today’s CPU computing power, allowed to discover that one of the 4 pieces given to the Laboratories (namely, one of the two pieces given to the Lab of Tucson, Arizona) was never dated, contrary to what stated in the Nature paper: this fact was kept secret for 22 years and casts a shadow on the good faith of the laboratories involved.