U
undead_rat
Guest
Carbon fourteen analysis is usually thought of as a scientific method of determining the age of an artifact. However, if that age is already known, the carbon fourteen data can be proof of an event. Suppose that a piece of linen cloth made in 1963 is subjected to C-14 testing. The result would not indicate a date anywhere near 1963. In fact, that linen cloth would have so much carbon fourteen in it that, if its C-14 data were taken as indicating a date, that date would be far into the future! In this case, our cloth’s C-14 data does not indicate a date at all. Testing of nuclear bombs in the 1950’s resulted in neutron fluxes which created carbon fourteen in the earth’s atmosphere. So the C-14 data of the 1963 linen is proof of the event of atmospheric atomic bomb testing in the 1950’s.
In 1898 Secundo Pia’s shocking photograph of the Shroud of Turin showed that its image of Jesus’ corpse had the characteristics of a perfect photographic negative, something impossible for any artist to accurately paint. After Vatican experts had spent some years studying and verifying all the historical documents connected with the Shroud, Pope Pius XI said this in 1936:
“These are the images of the Divine redeemer. . . .They derive from the object, surrounded by mystery, which—this can safely be said—it has now been established is no product of human hands. It is the Holy Shroud at Turin. …it is absolutely certain that it is not the work of man.”
The results of the intensive STURP investigation in 1978 confirmed what Pope Pius XI said. The image on the Shroud is not a painting and cannot be scientifically explained without the postulation of a miraculous event. In 1988 pieces of the Shroud were tested for carbon fourteen, and the analysis of its C-14 data was controlled by Prof. Edward Hall who was an atheist. He ignored the many proofs of the Shroud’s authenticity and refused to consider the possibility that a miracle might have enhanced the Shroud’s C-14 content. He declared the Holy Shroud to be “a load of rubbish,” and the British Museum believed his analysis, declaring the Shroud to be a medieval fake.
However, just as with our 1963 linen cloth, the Shroud’s date was already known. Therefore, any C-14 data that did not show a date of 2000 years old, had to be proof of an event, not a date. The Shroud’s C-14 data had a linear progression: as the piece tested became closer to the Shroud’s image, its date became younger. The conclusion is that the vanishing of Jesus’ corpse left a residual radiation of neutrons that caused nitrogen in the Shroud’s linen fibers to be converted into carbon fourteen. And that same vanishing also left a proton radiation that was the cause of the Shroud’s Divine Image. This theory is called the Historically Consistent Hypothesis, and it explains the many strange features that are found on the Shroud.***
The final conclusion is that the 1988 C-14 testing is proof that Jesus’ corpse really did vanish just as described in our Holy Gospels.
***TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015
In 1898 Secundo Pia’s shocking photograph of the Shroud of Turin showed that its image of Jesus’ corpse had the characteristics of a perfect photographic negative, something impossible for any artist to accurately paint. After Vatican experts had spent some years studying and verifying all the historical documents connected with the Shroud, Pope Pius XI said this in 1936:
“These are the images of the Divine redeemer. . . .They derive from the object, surrounded by mystery, which—this can safely be said—it has now been established is no product of human hands. It is the Holy Shroud at Turin. …it is absolutely certain that it is not the work of man.”
The results of the intensive STURP investigation in 1978 confirmed what Pope Pius XI said. The image on the Shroud is not a painting and cannot be scientifically explained without the postulation of a miraculous event. In 1988 pieces of the Shroud were tested for carbon fourteen, and the analysis of its C-14 data was controlled by Prof. Edward Hall who was an atheist. He ignored the many proofs of the Shroud’s authenticity and refused to consider the possibility that a miracle might have enhanced the Shroud’s C-14 content. He declared the Holy Shroud to be “a load of rubbish,” and the British Museum believed his analysis, declaring the Shroud to be a medieval fake.
However, just as with our 1963 linen cloth, the Shroud’s date was already known. Therefore, any C-14 data that did not show a date of 2000 years old, had to be proof of an event, not a date. The Shroud’s C-14 data had a linear progression: as the piece tested became closer to the Shroud’s image, its date became younger. The conclusion is that the vanishing of Jesus’ corpse left a residual radiation of neutrons that caused nitrogen in the Shroud’s linen fibers to be converted into carbon fourteen. And that same vanishing also left a proton radiation that was the cause of the Shroud’s Divine Image. This theory is called the Historically Consistent Hypothesis, and it explains the many strange features that are found on the Shroud.***
The final conclusion is that the 1988 C-14 testing is proof that Jesus’ corpse really did vanish just as described in our Holy Gospels.
***TEST THE SHROUD, Antonacci, 2015
Last edited:
