Carbon dating of the shroud Free sexchat with strangers
There have been expositions in 1998, 2000, 2010 and the current one.
However, the raw data were never released by the institutions.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.It would have been nice if some of that time, energy and money could have been put in another multi-disciplinary study.We now have Barberis saying another C-14 test should be done. Louis conference, there is a lot of debate among researchers whether it should be done.
Because with the quoted errors the Arizona data overspans an era of 540-95 = 445 to 753 93 = 846 ... So the data presented in table 1 are not INDIVIDUAL measurements, but the mean of TWO measurements.