Reply #199: Other tests?

[Az]

I would love to see this guy's work put through a proper peer review. First of all even if he is right and the original sample taken was from a patch this is not proof of anything concerning the rest of the shroud. It just means they have to do the test again on an proper sample.

It should also be noted that this individual is on a board of people trying to prove the shroud is valid. Though not listed in this particular article it has been made known that he a member of STURP(The Shroud of Turin Research Project). These are people trying to prove the shroud is real. Their findings should be put through a strainer and tested by others. Not for any specific malicious reasons (though they can come into play). But simply for adherance to objective standards. A bias can come into play whether the individual is aware of it or not.

And then there is the mention of other tests. This sounds more like tabloid journalism. It certainly is not proof of anything. It is simply inuendo.

This is interesting information. But it is proof of nothing. In science when one test is corrupted you do it again. You keep doing it again until you get a clear result. Do the carbon test again. Do it from a section of cloth that none contest. Let us be done with this thing.