Radiocarbon dating on the shroud of turin
He insists the sampled area was that of an interwoven medieval repair that was intentionally colored to match the “older, sepia-colored cloth” (Rogers 2005, 192, 193).
Rogers follows many other shroud defenders in attempting to discredit the medieval date given by radiocarbon testing (Nickell 1998, 150—151).
In a paper published in , Rogers (2005) claims that earlier carbon-14 dating tests—which proved the linen was produced between 12 (Damon et al.
1989)—were invalid because they were conducted on a sample taken from a medieval patch.
Indeed, textile experts specifically made efforts to select a site for taking the radiocarbon sample that was away from patches and seams (Damon et al. Rogers compared the threads with some small samples from elsewhere on the Shroud, claiming to find differences between the two sets of threads that “prove” the radiocarbon sample “was not part of the original cloth” of the Turin shroud (as stated in his abstract [Rogers 2005, 189]).
The reported differences include the presence—allegedly only on the “radiocarbon sample”—of cotton fibers and a coating of madder root dye in a binding medium that his tests “suggest” is gum Arabic.
He also found the madder, orpiment, azurite, and yellow ocher pigments, as well as paint fragments, including ultramarine and titanium white—together suggestive of the shroud’s origin in “an artist’s studio” (Mc Crone 1996, 85, 135)..