Originally Posted by
David Mo
The war against 14C dating of the Shroud began before it was done. See William Meacham paper
http://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm (1983). He proposed (or rather demanded) some unfeasible conditions. The Catholic Church had never accepted to take off any sample direct from the body area. Imagine, the Christ’s Sacred Body! Furthermore, he claimed the 14C dating was not reliable on the basis of some irrelevant examples. And so on. You can see Alcock’s comment in the same paper: “if one were so cynical as to suspect that he is preparing the groundwork for a defence of the authenticity hypothesis”. I’m afraid I’m a little “cynical”... or just sceptical about Meacham’s true intentions.
THE William Meacham?
Oh, that's a lovely find, Dave Mo.
Meacham is familiar to us all as a victim of the Kouznetsov scam.
Quote:
Kouznetsov et al, writing in the Journal of Archaeological Science (23:109-122) argue, very convincingly I felt, about the possibilities for carbon exchange during the 1532 fire and especially about how the C13/C12 ratio would NOT reflect this event.
http://www.shroud.com/c14debat.htm
Ian Wilson wrote his expose of Kouznetsov here:
Quote:
In the last Newsletter (no.43) I expressed some warnings regarding Dr. Dmitri Kouznetsov, the Moscow scientist who claimed to have scientifically demonstrated how the Shroud was 'enriched' with carbon 14 during the fire of 1532, thereby making misleadingly 'young' the date attributed to it by radiocarbon dating. In a letter also published in Newsletter 43 Dr. John Jackson, Director of the Turin Shroud Center of Colorado, queried the manner in which Dr.Kouznetsov had represented certain of his (Dr. Jackson's) calculations as if these were his own.
http://www.shroud.com/bsts4405.htm
and here:
http://www.shroud.com/bsts4301.htm
ETA:
As of 2011, Kouznetsov still has an Internet presence as a legitimate Sindonologist!
http://www.zoominfo.com/#!search/pro...rgetid=profile
Truly amazing.