From: jtem01@gmail.com   
      
   Charcoal is carbon dated all the time.   
      
   Charcoal is, what? Burnt wood?   
      
   Burning something doesn't appear to alter the age. In fact, the   
   big problem with burning wood is that it exposes the core --   
   burn away the younger, outer surface -- so the dating is going   
   to be older than the outer part.   
      
   Trees can grow for hundreds of years before they're chopped down,   
   and the inner core of the wood is the oldest part....   
      
   Nothing in the practice of dating wood/charcoal suggests that   
   a scorched -- not even burnt by scorched -- part of the shroud   
   should test as significantly younger than the rest.   
      
   Google:  does charcoal dating match wood dating   
      
   So the claim of the Steven is as follows:   
      
   #1.  Shroud was burned, parts thereof.   
      
   #2.  Burning cloth yields a significantly younger Carbon 14   
   date than the unburned portions.   
      
   #3.  The dating C14 dating of the shroud is do to the testing   
   being conducted on parts that were burned instead of unburned   
   parts.   
      
   As it turns out fire isn't new, so what we need is a real life   
   example of a cloth that was burned yielding a significantly   
   younger date than could be confidently established through   
   other methods.   
      
   A work around might be, say, ash from cloth destroyed in a fire   
   when the date of the fire can be confidently established by other   
   means.   
      
   Does any actual examples exist, or are the claims surrounding   
   the shroud nonsense?   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
   --   
   https://jtem.tumblr.com/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)