| − | From [http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021 this] source, I don't think the "Birmingham Koran" can be used a basis to doubt the Koran's authenticity. Radiocarbon dating is no where near accurate enough to support a claim that this manuscript pre-dates Mohammed's revelation. If we accept the dating as accurate to the exact year (a claim the researchers do not make), the parchment would be a few years older than the traditionally accepted date of the first revelation. The dating is for the death of the animal the provided the hide for parchment. The writing could have been added some time later. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:56, 4 September 2015 (EDT) | + | From [http://www.bbc.com/news/business-33436021 this] source, I don't think the "Birmingham Koran" can be used a basis to doubt the Koran's authenticity. Radiocarbon dating is no where near accurate enough to support a claim that this manuscript pre-dates Mohammed's revelation. If we accept the dating as accurate to the exact year (a claim the researchers do not make), the parchment would be a few years older than the traditionally accepted date of the first revelation. The dating is for the death of the animal that provided the hide for parchment. The writing could have been added some time later. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:56, 4 September 2015 (EDT) |