Ray Rogers, one of the lead research scientists involved with STURP, became furious when he found out the integrity of his work product had been challenged by amateurs in a published, peer-reviewed paper.
He said the claims of Benford and Marino were absurd and promised to prove they were wrong by testing material from the original sample still in his possession.
After all, test results obtained by careful application of the scientific method are really tough to dispute.
And the 1988 tests seemed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the Shroud was a forgery.
Instead, Rogers found powerful evidence suggesting Benford and Marino had been absolutely correct in saying the material for the original carbon dating tests had been taken from a contaminated section of the shroud, identifying cotton fibers in the sample not found in the rest of the shroud.
One test indicated that a copious amount of human blood had saturated the fabric after oozing from the gruesome wounds on the head and torso of the body that the shroud had covered.And now we even know that the shroud could have been in Jerusalem in 33 AD.Here’s what we should acknowledge that cannot ever be proved: The shroud temporarily covered the mortal remains of Jesus the Christ while He was in the tomb prior to His resurrection.If queried for their opinion about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin, probably 9 out of every 10 people would essentially say the same thing — carbon testing performed in 1988 clearly proved that the religious artifact was nothing more than a brilliantly conceived fraud.I can’t say that I find fault with the Shroud’s critics, because I’ve seen the same evidence.