From: user6340@newsgrouper.org.invalid   
      
   JTEM  posted:   
   > On 12/26/25 9:13 PM, Steven Douglas wrote:   
   >   
   > > No, the dating is wrong.   
   >   
   > So you base everything on evidence that doesn't exist, instead   
   > of the evidence that does exist.   
      
   Wrong. I'm wondering why you apparently believe   
   that carbon dating of 1988 is infallible, to the   
   point you won't even entertain the idea that the   
   1988 carbon dating of the Shroud might be wrong.   
      
   So here's something for you to ponder -- a study   
   that took a thorough look at the flawed processes   
   that were used by three laboratories that each   
   came up with different answers.   
      
   I doubt you'll bother to read these new facts,   
   because it seems that once you get stuck on some   
   fact you believe to be true, it takes you a long   
   time to learn something new:   
      
   Title: "Statistical and Proactive Analysis of an   
   Inter-Laboratory Comparison: The Radiocarbon Dating   
   of the Shroud of Turin"   
      
   [quoting] "Clearly, the statistical analyses do not unveil   
   the correct age of the Shroud. Our review does not aim to   
   discuss the so-called 'authenticity' of the Shroud; we show   
   there are reasons to believe that the 1988 radiocarbon dating   
   does not match current accuracy requirements. Should this be   
   the case, it would be interesting to plan a strategy in order   
   to know the accurate age of the Shroud of Turin." [end quoting]   
      
   https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7597180/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)