Changes

The most advanced technique, Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS), is non-invasive and was used in research published in 2022 to analyze structural degradation of the Shroud’s cellulose fibers. This "focuses on the breakdown of cellulose chains, a process that accelerates with time and environmental conditions, making it a potentially more accurate dating method than radiocarbon dating for ancient textiles. ... [T]he degradation observed in the Shroud’s fibers suggests it is far older than the results of the radiocarbon tests indicated,"<ref name="WAXS">https://www.timothyedmoore.com/groundbreaking-research-suggests-shroud-of-turin-could-be-2000-years-old/</ref> '''''consistent with an age of about 2,000 years'''''. "[I]f the Shroud were only seven centuries old, it would have required consistent exposure to temperatures far higher than those found in its known history to reach the observed state of cellulose degradation."<ref name="WAXS"/>

The most advanced technique, Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS), is non-invasive and was used in research published in 2022 to analyze structural degradation of the Shroud’s cellulose fibers. This "focuses on the breakdown of cellulose chains, a process that accelerates with time and environmental conditions, making it a potentially more accurate dating method than radiocarbon dating for ancient textiles. ... [T]he degradation observed in the Shroud’s fibers suggests it is far older than the results of the radiocarbon tests indicated,"<ref name="WAXS">https://www.timothyedmoore.com/groundbreaking-research-suggests-shroud-of-turin-could-be-2000-years-old/</ref> '''''consistent with an age of about 2,000 years'''''. "[I]f the Shroud were only seven centuries old, it would have required consistent exposure to temperatures far higher than those found in its known history to reach the observed state of cellulose degradation."<ref name="WAXS"/>

Using (invasive) radiocarbon dating of the Shroud is subject to several inherent uncertainties: the probability that the sample was taken from the original cloth rather than a patch, the probability that the miracle did not undermine the assumptions of radiocarbon dating, and the probability that centuries of mold, bacteria and fungi, and the 1532 fire which damaged the Shroud, did not distort the dating. If each of these probabilities is roughly 50%, then the chance of radiocarbon dating of the Shroud being accurate is only (1/2)³ = 12.5%.

Invasive radiocarbon dating of the Shroud is subject to several inherent uncertainties: the probability that the sample was taken from the original cloth rather than a patch, the probability that the miracle did not undermine the assumptions of radiocarbon dating, and the probability that centuries of mold, bacteria and fungi, and the 1532 fire which damaged the Shroud, did not distort the dating. If each of these probabilities is roughly 50%, then the chance of radiocarbon dating of the Shroud being accurate is only (1/2)³ = 12.5%.

Radiocarbon dating "is vulnerable to contamination, and often yields imprecise results, particularly for the period" of [[Jesus]] because "[t]here are fewer artefacts with known dates to calibrate the scrolls' age against."<ref>https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2025-06-05/dead-sea-scrolls-ai-dating-palaeography/105374410</ref> [[Carbon dating]] test results of the Shroud conflict with each other and thus are not credible.  In 1988, a small snippet of the Shroud was extracted, '''''but the "C-14 results of the three labs fall outside the bounds of the Pearson's chi-square test," illustrating a flaw in the dating''''' that was likely due to a repair seam that ran diagonally "through the area from which the sample was taken."<ref>http://www.juliantrubin.com/encyclopedia/bible/shroud_of_turin.html</ref>  A peer-reviewed scientific paper later demonstrated the invalidity of those results, suggesting instead that the Shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old,<ref>Rogers, Raymond N., "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin". Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425 Issue 1–2, pp. 189-194 (Jan. 20, 2005)[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6THV-4DTBVHC-1&_user=10&_handle=B-WA-A-W-WE-MsSAYWA-UUA-AAUYYDZUYC-AAUZVCZYYC-YZEWAVVVC-WE-U&_fmt=full&_coverDate=01%2F20%2F2005&_rdoc=26&_orig=browse&_srch=%23toc%235292%232005%23995749998%23553672!&_cdi=5292&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=3d89246a5d4144616be7657f0d83b6cf]</ref><ref>Mark Antonacci "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence"</ref> disproving the 1988 results that claimed that the Shroud originated between A.D. 1238 and 1430.

Radiocarbon dating "is vulnerable to contamination, and often yields imprecise results, particularly for the period" of [[Jesus]] because "[t]here are fewer artefacts with known dates to calibrate the scrolls' age against."<ref>https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2025-06-05/dead-sea-scrolls-ai-dating-palaeography/105374410</ref> [[Carbon dating]] test results of the Shroud conflict with each other and thus are not credible.  In 1988, a small snippet of the Shroud was extracted, '''''but the "C-14 results of the three labs fall outside the bounds of the Pearson's chi-square test," illustrating a flaw in the dating''''' that was likely due to a repair seam that ran diagonally "through the area from which the sample was taken."<ref>http://www.juliantrubin.com/encyclopedia/bible/shroud_of_turin.html</ref>  A peer-reviewed scientific paper later demonstrated the invalidity of those results, suggesting instead that the Shroud is between 1,300 and 3,000 years old,<ref>Rogers, Raymond N., "Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin". Thermochimica Acta, Volume 425 Issue 1–2, pp. 189-194 (Jan. 20, 2005)[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6THV-4DTBVHC-1&_user=10&_handle=B-WA-A-W-WE-MsSAYWA-UUA-AAUYYDZUYC-AAUZVCZYYC-YZEWAVVVC-WE-U&_fmt=full&_coverDate=01%2F20%2F2005&_rdoc=26&_orig=browse&_srch=%23toc%235292%232005%23995749998%23553672!&_cdi=5292&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=3d89246a5d4144616be7657f0d83b6cf]</ref><ref>Mark Antonacci "Resurrection of the Shroud: New Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence"</ref> disproving the 1988 results that claimed that the Shroud originated between A.D. 1238 and 1430.