A probabilistic model to quantify the results of the research (original) (raw)

A probabilistic model to quantify the results of the research on the Turin Shroud

Citeseer

To synthesize the variety of the contrasting results coming from the researches done on the Turin Shroud, a probabilistic model capable of consider mutually excluding events, is proposed. It is based on the definition of three possible alternatives (A=authentic, F=fake, N=not A or F) regarding the cloth origin. Each alternative is then evaluated from the assignment of the corresponding probability, with relative uncertainty, to each statement, relative to the results of the Shroud investigations. Each statement is composed by 7 coefficients: 3 relative to the corresponding alternative (A, F and N) probability, 3 relative to the corresponding uncertainty and one to evaluate the result importance. As an example, results obtained from a very simple probabilistic analysis that considers only 7 statements are compared with that published by other authors. Abbreviations: ST = Shroud of Turin; MST = Man of the Shroud of Turin.

Abstract A probabilistic model to quantify the results of the research on the Turin Shroud

2008

Systematic Evaluation of Recent Research on the Shroud of Turin

Theology and Science, 2024

This study critically reviews four decades of academic research on the Shroud of Turin, a highly debated archaeological artifact. Employing advanced epistemological methods such as argument mapping and Bayesian analysis, the study systematically evaluates the two leading hypotheses: the medieval creation of the Shroud and its authenticity as the burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth. This examination suggests a warrant for the proponents’ belief in the authenticity hypothesis. It highlights the vitality and complexity of the controversy surrounding the dating and image formation process of the Shroud of Turin.

Introductory Paper : Scientific Results on the Turin Shroud Coming from a Paduan University Research Project

MATEC Web of Conferences, 2015

Turin Shroud (TS) is a linen cloth 4.4 m long and 1.1 m wide which shows two, front and back images of a man scourged, crowned with thorns and crucified, who died on a cross and was stabbed in the side with a lance after his death. The Catholic Christian tradition identifies this Man as Jesus Christ resurrected after dead, but not all are unanimous in this identification, partly because science has not been able to give definitive answers. To try to improve a bit the inconclusive answers to which the Science is arrived, a Research Project entitled: "Multidisciplinary analysis applied to the Turin Shroud: study of the body image, of possible ambient pollution and of micro-particles capable to characterize the linen fabric." has been assigned by the University of Padua (Italy) to the Author, who performed various studies on this theme in collaboration with other experts, also of other Italian Universities. In reference to the body image, that is not explainable by Science nor reproducible up to now, experimental tests based on Corona Discharge, produced by intense electric fields, have shown that it is possible to reproduce many of these very peculiar image features. Regarding the TS dating, after the demonstration that the 1988 radiocarbon result is not statistically reliable, probably because of environmental pollution, alternative dating methods based on chemical and mechanical tests showed that its age is compatible with the period in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine.

The Plethora of Disciplines Used to Study the Shroud of Turin

2022

Since 1898, science has been interested in the study of the Shroud of Turin, believed by many to be the burial cloth of the historical Jesus of Nazareth. This article provides a list of scientific and non-scientific disciplines involved in the study of the cloth. The data begs the question: could a medieval forger know enough about all these disciplines to be able to convince many 20th and 21st-century scientists, doctors and researchers that the cloth was authentic?

The Perennial Problem of Dishonesty in Science. Has it Occurred in Research on the Turin Shroud?

2023

When most people think of scientists, they generally think of a group of generally honest and reliable. Unfortunately, however, many known frauds have been perpetrated in scientific research. I searched on google for “dishonesty in science” and got 29,500,000 hits! Scientists, like everyone, have preconceptions and biases. Still, it’s part of their job description to do everything they can to limit them so that their conclusions can be objective as possible. They aim to make a conclusion based on what the evidence indicates. This might entail changing from a previous position. One of the remedies for limiting preconceptions and biases is the system of peer-review, in which scientists pay to have their work evaluated by other scientists, usually anonymous, who have expertise in the area of the topic being written about. It is usually the best way to ensure honesty and accuracy in scientific research, but that system isn’t perfect either. Given the number of hits in my Google search, it’s easy to see that there are ways for scientists to propagate falsehoods. Scientists can lie for various reasons, including political, financial and egotistical. The Shroud evokes strong emotions in many people. Those emotions have a strong potential for affecting scientific analysis of it. Two of the most important scientific tests ever performed happened in the twentieth-century on the Turin Shroud (a.k.a. The Shroud of Turin), believed by many to be the actual cloth that Jesus of Nazareth was buried in after his crucifixion. It contains the front and back images of an anatomically-and-physiologically-correct man with all of the wounds that the Gospels indicate happened to Jesus. In 1978, the Shroud of Turin Research Project, known as “STURP,” a group of mainly American scientists, most of whom worked in the U.S.’ nuclear and space programs, was permitted to study the Shroud for five days around the clock. Their mission was to determine how the image got onto the cloth, no more, no less. They could not come up with an answer, and concluded that the image was not the product of an artist. Some skeptics, especially anti-religionists, were not pleased with STURP’s findings. STURP was subsequently often accused of being a group of religious zealots out to prove the Resurrection of Jesus. They were not. Although most were Christian, only a few could be considered devout; the team included Jews and agnostics as well. As men who built bombs and helped send crafts into space, they were mainly interested in the Shroud from a purely scientific perspective. Their findings were published in top-tier scientific journals. Six C-14 labs were seriously considered by Church authorities to take part in a well-known technique: “radiocarbon dating” (C-14): Brookhaven, Harwell, Oxford, Rochester, Arizona, and Zurich. Although the method was invented in the 1940s, it wasn’t until the late 1970s that smaller samples could be used. In 1988, it was used by three independent labs, University of Arizona (United States), Oxford University (England), and ETH in Zurich (Switzerland). They reported with a putative 95% confidence factor that the Shroud only dated to AD 1260-1390. With those results, it could not have wrapped Jesus, who died in the first half of the first-century AD. Most people on the street, who rarely read peer-reviewed papers, think of C-14 dating as practically infallible. But it is hardly that. C-14 dating is based on a number of assumptions; various factors can skew one or more of those assumptions--and the final results. And most people don’t know that it is commonly used as a confirmatory test; i.e., its results are looked at in the context of other dating data. If it doesn’t match with other known data, the results are discarded, even if it is not known why it didn’t match the rest of the data. Even though the C-14 results conflicted with the results that STURP had publicized, the single C-14 test was seemingly promoted to be the final arbiter of the Shroud’s age. When the results of the C-14 test were announced in October 1988, most people, who generally trust scientists and who perceive C-14 dating as practically infallible, tend just to believe that the Shroud was just a medieval fake—even though no one to this day has been able to discover how the images got onto the cloth. Numerous people who were very familiar with the testing and results that STURP had obtained kept researching with the belief that it was more likely that something had gone wrong with the C-14 tests than with all the data STURP collected, pointing to the probability that the Shroud wrapped Jesus. There are now more journal articles contesting the C-14 results than supporting it. I have written an eight-hundred-page book titled The 1988 C-14 Dating Of The Shroud of Turin: A Stunning Exposé, which recounts questionable behavior and decisions made before, during and after the C-14 test. I will address multiple aspects of the Shroud dating via various subjects and address specific actions, and, in one case, groundless accusations, of some groups and individuals.

Statistical analysis of dusts taken from different areas of the Turin Shroud

This paper has been written in honour of the lamented Giovanni Riggi di Numana, a later STURP Member who was authorized to vacuum some dusts from the Turin Shroud in 1978 and 1988. One of his purposes was to detect and sample linen fibers coming from the Turin Shroud from other particles, that will be useful for future studies. For this reason he freely and gratis furnished some aspired dusts "to lost fund" to the first author. The present paper is a first result to realize hope of Giovanni Riggi di Numana who should have been very happy to see that his important contribution to the Turin Shroud was not forgotten by the scientific community.

Scientific investigation of the Shroud of Turin

Applied Optics, 1980

This article introduces three research papers discussing various scientific tests run on the Shroud ofTurinan ancient piece of linen that appears to bear faint images of a man's body. It also briefly revi1::ws the chemical, photographic, and x-ray tesl.s nOt deal t with int.he three research papers, which are concerned with optical and IR spectroscopy and thermography.

Past Testing of the Shroud of Turin and Proposals for the Future

2023

The Shroud of Turin, believed by many to be the authentic burial cloth of Jesus of Nazareth, is also thought by some to be the most-intensely studied artifact in human history. When the first public photographs were taken in 1898, the amateur photographer, Secondo Pia, was shocked to discover on his negative plate a likelike (positive) image. He was so surprised that he almost dropped the glass plate. (Photography had not been around long at that time.) Because of this peculiar characteristic, scientists began to get very interested in the Shroud. However, multiple decades would pass before extensive scientific testing was done on the cloth. This article will look at the three major scientific examinations done during the 20th century: *The 1969 & 1973 Turin Commission *The 1978 Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) *The 1988 C-14 Dating of the Shroud A restoration of the Shroud was done in 2002. Since that was related to conservation and not related to authenticity, per se, that event will not be covered here. The Turin Commission did some studies in 1969 and 1973. The scientists and researchers, mostly Italians, had been appointed by Turin Cardinal Michele Pellegrino. Their report, in Italian, was published in 1976. An English translation was made; I have access to a copy. At least one researcher believed there was evidence that the Shroud was an artistic endeavor. Others believed it could date to the time of Jesus. In 1978, the owner of the Shroud, King Umberto, the last King of Italy, gave permission for a group of mainly American scientists known as The Shroud of Turin Research Project, to do nondestructive testing for five full days and one-hundred-twenty hours straight. The group included many scientists who worked in the U.S.’ space and nuclear programs. They concluded that the images were not the product of an artist, and asserted it had wrapped the body of a scourged and crucified man, whose blood was still on the cloth. STURP had more members and better expertise and equipment than the Turin Commission. In 1984, STURP made proposals for twenty-six additional tests on the Shroud, including the widely-desired radiocarbon dating test (C-14). Despite having the most expertise, the Vatican rejected their proposal, decided to do a C-14 test only, and chose three facilities at Oxford, Tucson and Zurich to perform the test. They concluded that the Shroud only dated to AD 1260-1390. However, many scientists and researchers challenged the results on multiple grounds. The article will also look at additional testing proposals made by STURP and independent researchers. The three major examinations and all the proposals are listed in chronological order. Summaries, abstracts, or closing comments are reproduced where available, highlights are listed, and comments are made where appropriate. It will be updated as needed.

A probabilistic model to quantify the results of the research (original) (raw)

Related papers