Shroud of Turin Negative Images Unexplained: 2005 Facts

Shroud of Turin Negative Images

The most common picture of the Shroud of Turin is a photographic negative of the facial image on the cloth. Lighter and darker visually-blended colors are reversed. For instance, on the Shroud itself, the tip of the nose contains many color-bearing bits of coating close together that seems dark. But when photographed, the negative that is produced in the camera shows a nose tip that appears almost white.

This phenomenon was not discovered until 1898 when an amateur photographer, Secondo Pia, first photographed the Shroud and, to his complete surprise, discovered that his photographic negative (a glass-plate in those days) was a positive image.

In 1898 Secondo Pia discovered the negative properties of the picture of Jesus on the Shroud

This visual characteristic of the Shroud's image led some to believe that the image is a form of medieval proto-photograph. Chemically, this is not so. The carbohydrate layer where the image resides is not photosensitive. Images analysis shows that the image is not the product of reflected light, which it would have to be if the image was photographic.

It is hard to imagine how a faker of relics created a negative image hundreds of years before the discovery of photographic negativity. How did he know that he had it right with no ability to test his work. The negativity is extraordinarily precise and correct. And how did he do so by altering the chemical properties of the carbohydrate coating in which the image resides? But the big question is why?

Shroud of Turin Facts Check More Facts

Much of the scientific material on this site is based on the work of Ray Rogers. Rogers, a chemist, is a science Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education. He has published many scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and U.S. Government publications. In 1978, together with several other scientists, he was invited to personally examine the Shroud of Turin in Italy for several days. He collected numerous measurements and samples of fibers and particulate materials for further study. Rogers died March 8, 2005..

Editorial Comment

There is little question among those familiar with the topic that the biggest mistake ever made in carbon 14 dating was the Shroud of Turin.

Sadly, this mistake will be understood by some as meaning that carbon 14 dating is prone to error, subject to unexplainable anomalies or plagued by problems of contamination; none of which is true.

Let's be perfectly clear: carbon 14 dating is an excellent and very accurate scientific method for determining the age of many things as old as 50,000 years.

The failure to obtain a reliable date for the Shroud of Turin is not about flaws in carbon 14 dating methods or contamination. It is not about the problems, so often discussed in the media, of mysterious biological polymers growing on the cloth's fibers or new carbon introduced into the Shroud's cloth by a scorching fire in 1532.

It is not about the sloppy work by three very prestigious carbon 14 dating laboratories. And it is not, as some suggest, about conspiracies dreamed up to prove religious or anti-religious arguments (the Shroud is a religious object for some).

It is about a stupid mistake.

Let me illustrate: Recently I sent a soil sample to a testing laboratory to find out why my lawn was doing so poorly. The lab reported back that the soil was perfect for grass. It had the right nutrients and the pH was right on target, neither too acidic or alkaline.

I didn't think so. What had gone wrong?

It turns out that a few weeks earlier I had repaired a spot in my lawn where my dog had peed and killed the grass. I dug out a small section of soil and filled the hole with loam I had purchased from a garden supply store. Without realizing it, I had taken a sample for testing from that repaired area.

The sample was not representative of my lawn. It was chemically unlike the rest of my lawn. The lab had perfectly analyzed an invalid sample.

Similarly, as we now know, from National Geographic News, PBS and several scientific papers, that the carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin was done with an invalid sample.

M. Sue Benford and Joseph G. Marino, with the help of several textile experts, undertook a detailed examination of the documentation photographs of the carbon 14 samples and identified clear indications of a medieval patch.

Independently, Ray Rogers, a Fellow of the University of California, Los Alamos National Laboratory and a charter member of the Coalition for Excellence in Science Education has examined actual threads and fibers adjacent to where the samples were snipped. In a paper he published with Anna Arnoldi of the University of Milan, Rogers reported finding indisputable chemical evidence of a repair patch. He found dyestuff and spliced threads. Others, using scanning electronic microscopes and advanced spectral analysis tools have confirmed his findings.

This mistake of using an invalid sample should not be allowed to tarnish the reputation of carbon 14 dating. Unfortunately, we live in a world of easy and careless polemics. There are some, as well, who because of religious convictions cannot accept the conclusions of carbon 14 dating. Scientists cannot properly challenge matters of faith on the basis of science alone. But it would be unfortunate if those who hold certain beliefs use an erroneous understanding about carbon 14 dating to challenge carbon 14 dating when it is not carbon 14 dating that is at fault.

The mistake must now be openly admitted in the interest of scientific integrity. It was a careless mistake, a stupid mistake, a foolish mistake.

Carbon 14 dating is an invaluable tool for archeology and science. The mistake made in dating the Shroud of Turin does not diminish this fact.

In 1898 Secondo Pia discovered the negative properties of the picture of Jesus on the Shroud

Presented by:

Shroud of Turin Story
History, Science and Many Topics

Science

Shroud of Turin face as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Face on the Shroud as it appears when photographed. This is the negative.

Gum encrusted cotton fiber found only in the carbon 14 sample area and not elsewhere on the Shroud of Turin.

Spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area of the Shroud of Turin

Close up view of spliced thread in the carbon 14 sample area

Microscopic view of fibers from the carbon 14 area when dissolved in water.

Photomicrograph, gum is swelling and slowly detaching from the fibers and alizarin mordant lakes can be seen. Yellow dye is in solution.

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase Constrast Microscopy of a single image fiber from the Shroud of Turin

Phase-contrast microscopy of a single image fiber. Image is a reddish-brown caramel-like complex carbon bond, a chemical change within a super thin coating of crude starch on the fabric's outermost fibers. It is not paint or any kind of applied pigment. It is likely caused by bodily amine vapors reacting with saccharides in the starch.

Threads consisting of twisted bundles of fibers. Shows color in starch coating

This is how the face appears on the Shroud of Turin.

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image found on the backside of the cloth in 2004

Second face image recently discovered with image analysis technology. This a a computer enhanced view. It matches the face on the front of the Shroud. The images are doubly-superficial meaning that nothing soaked through.

Picture of the Shroud of Turin