Carbon dating of the shroud
One of the new articles quoted Pope John Paul II in 1998 saying continued research should be done.
I think researchers have done their part in continuing research but one can only do so much with the 1978 data.
In 2017, in response to a legal request, all raw data kept by the British Museum were made accessible.
A statistical analysis of the Nature article and the raw data strongly suggests that homogeneity is lacking in the data and that the procedure should be reconsidered.The claim in the 1989 Nature article was: But as we saw in 17Feb19, the "with at least 95% confidence" was a lie (see below) by the author of the article, Dr Michael Tite, then of the British Museum.
more definitive than they really are":"The term `scientific fraud' is often assumed to mean the wholesale invention of data.
But this is almost certainly the rarest kind of fabrication.
Some people believe that the shroud cannot be tested accurately and oppose such testing.
One reason: they think that a resurrection miracle changed the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12.
If new testing did not disprove the authenticity, it could bring a lot more people to Christianity.Note that the midpoint of 574±45 is 1950-574 = 1376, which 21 years after 1355.So that was combined and averaged with 606±41 to make it 591±30, the midpoint of which is 1950-591 = 1359, still 4 years past 1355!If it is done, a lot would obviously depend on the background study and the various entities involved in the testing.Heaven forbid if it would be anything like the 88 testing.
Mathematically, the calculations following Wilson-Ward, with EIGHT and FOUR data will give the same result.