Once a month I put all the junk mail into a bin liner and walk it to the recycling centre that is just a handy 1 and 3/4 miles away. (Well, we all have to do our bit for the environment, and since most of the junk mail boasts of being recycled paper, I feel a civic duty to return it whence it came on foot instead of using the car). Of course, I always try to avoid reading other people’s unshredded post when I get to the paper skip, like that stapled sheaf of animated correspondence between the headmaster of a nearby secondary school and his Board of Governors on what he considered a right and proper salary settlement for the coming year, pointing out that he had had no proper pay increase the last three years, and thought that all had been forgiven and forgotten re a certain incident. No, I would never dream of taking a casual glance at what lies on top of that bin, or maybe in the top 12 inches or so, not wishing to be privy to other people’s secrets.
So the only reason I publish the following transcript from a sheet of A4 with spidery handwriting is because of my over-riding sense of civic duty. The writer – clearly an opinion former of the highest standing in society – had clearly not intended to discard so well-thought out a document. One of his (or her) office cleaning staff must have seen it on the carpet next to the employer’s desk and assumed it was intended for the waste-paper bin. So if anyone reading this blog recognises these words as their own, then fortune smiles – you have a back-up copy.
“Re-run of the carbon dating? No way. Fight it tooth and nail… Say:
1. Before considering any re-run, we need first to conclude the post-mortem and apportionment of blame for the 1988 testing fiasco by the three totally incompetent laboratories. We need to uncover all the conspiracies (worth a few more documentaries at least). That could take time – a few years, decades even-
at least until the cash registers stop ringing..
2. Any answer (except the right one) is bound to be wrong due to multiple contamination issues. Scientists, as we know, are incapable of detecting contaminants, even with the most modern analytical techniques.
Scientists are arrogant people who need to be put in their place. To those scientists who say you only need to extract and purify ONE component of linen, e.g. cellulose, to 99.9% purity, we say go boil your head, correction, don’t you get clever with me, boyo…
t might give the same answer as before, but with greater statistical precision
4. The 1532 fire released carbon monoxide, CO, which was bound to react with linen to give the wrong answer (but would have had a negligible effect if the answer had been the right one). CO is a dangerous poison. It attaches to haemoglobin. Anything that is capable of attaching itself to blood haemoglobin is bound to combine with linen as well, right? Why? Do I have to give you a chemistry lesson? Haemoglobin has an iron centre (wikipedia) right? And we’ve all seen linen being ironed to get rid of the creases. That makes it attract carbon monoxide…. the iron. God, some people are so slow…
5. Speaking of Whom: He will always see that the scientists who mess with the Shroud will arrive at the wrong answer. God made the physical laws, so can change them at a whim, just to show the scientists who is boss, and/or wrong-foot them.
(They hate it when you say that)
6. There will always be a sampling error, no matter how many samples one takes. But multiple samples will gradually destroy the Shroud so there’s finally nothing left. So there’s no point in repeating the sampling.
Ya boo sucks to you.
7. It’s a well known fact that carbon dating does not work on linen. It only works on paper, papyrus, wood, straw, amber, charcoal, horn, hide, blood, bone, hair and wool. So there’s no point in trying to date the Shroud.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ….
8. The results will always be wrong because of the bioplastic film (i.e. microorganisms unknown to conventional science) that can grow on the linen, messing up the radiocarbon dating. They do so with no obvious or credible carbon source, no chlorophyll and no energy source. In other words they are unique and highly specialized organisms that are only capable of growing and reproducing on the Shroud of Turin and other holy relics. You only know they are there when you get the wrong answer in carbon dating.
9. Thymol* has recently been used to fumigate the reliquary in which is housed the Shroud. Thymol is a phenolic. Phenolics are chemically reactive. Thymol might not mess up C-dating, but no scientist can say for certain that it does not.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
10. If all else fails one can say that Resurrection messed up the isotopic ratios (C-14 to C-12) on which carbon dating depends. Resurrection tends to do that. It’s a proven fact. Well, maybe not proven, but fiendishly difficult for any scientist to disprove.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
😉 Were you able to spot what was fiction? Answer – ALL of it needless to say (except the bit about the correspondence on a local headteacher’s salary negotiations being dumped at my recycling centre!)
* Some 24 hours after my posting this yesterday, this comment (right on cue, well almost, some might say) has appeared on Daniel Porter’s shroudstory.com site: