tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post6353568845736875278..comments2024-03-14T08:08:39.968+08:00Comments on The Shroud of Turin: Another form of fraud - computer hacking: Steps in the development of my radiocarbon dating of the Turin Shroud hacker theory #5Stephen E. Joneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-49431396007869948802017-03-12T17:25:41.813+08:002017-03-12T17:25:41.813+08:00Anonymous
>If the computers were hacked then t...Anonymous<br /><br />>If the computers were hacked then the scientists who did the testing must have discovered this soon afterwards. <br /><br />Not necessarily. As I have previously stated, and supported with a quote from Stoll's book, it is possible to write a program that self-destructs after it has done its job. <br /><br />Hacking was illegal so the alleged hacker, Timothy Linick, would almost certainly have included that provision in his program because he would not want to leave evidence of his crime for a prosecution to use against him.<br /><br />I have previously stated that after Linick's suicide the laboratory leaders may have suspected that he had hacked Arizona's dating, but they may have had no hard evidence of it. And unless they knew about Karl Koch, which seems unlikely, they would not have been able to understand how he could have hacked Zurich and Oxford's dating. <br /><br />In which case they would have thought that the 1325 +/- 65 years date of the Shroud was about right anyway. As I pointed out in one of my posts, Gove must have known that Linick was the leaker of Arizona's first "1350" date, but dismissed it as "a guess" because it "corresponds very closely to the shroud's known historic date":<br /><br />"I must say I wondered about Luckett's date of 1350 because it was the date Donahue announced to me when I was present at the first radiocarbon measurement on the shroud in 6 May 1988. Of course, it also corresponds very closely to the shroud's known historic date. However, I still assumed Luckett had said he got the number from Oxford. When I read that he claimed he got it from one of the other two labs I worried that it might have come from someone who was present at Arizona during the first measurement. However, it did not really matter now since all three labs had submitted their results to the British Museum and so none of them could be influenced by this real or imagined leak. Shirley convinced me that it was, in fact, a guess as Hall had stated. After all, the historic date for the shroud was circa 1353 when de Charny founded the church in Lirey, France purportedly to house the shroud." (Gove, H.E., 1996, "Relic, Icon or Hoax?: Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud," pp.279-280).<br /><br />>How do you explain than none of them ever talked about this? <br /><br />See above on lack of evidence. But as I have stated in various posts, I am still hopeful that at least one of the scientists involved in the dating might break ranks and air their suspicions that Linick had hacked Arizona's dating. But the problem then is that he/she and his/her colleagues who also had their suspicions, would have then been involved in a cover-up for the last ~29 years.<br /><br />Which reminds me that next year, 2018, is the 30th anniversary of the 1988 radiocarbon dating of the Shroud, so I am hopeful that may prompt some inside information about the hacking to come out.<br /><br />>I am also not aware of any of the three laboratories requesting to test the unused sample.<br /><br />They don't need to request anyone that they radiocarbon date that unused sample held by Arizona. The Vatican had already approved that part of the sample cut from the Shroud in 1988 be radiocarbon dated. So Arizona could date it anytime, to prove that the 1260-1390 radiocarbon date was approximately correct. That they have not done so is evidence that they now know, or suspect, that it was not correct. See my post of <a href="https://goo.gl/lAeO6R" rel="nofollow">13Jun14</a>.<br /><br />Stephen E. Jones<br />----------------------------------<br />MY POLICIES. Comments are moderated. Those I consider off-topic, offensive or sub-standard will not appear. Except that comments under my latest post can be on any one Shroud-related topic. To avoid time-wasting debate I normally allow only one comment per individual under each one of my posts.Stephen E. Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16183223752386599799noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8955388713581848615.post-33591796420707718242017-03-12T15:31:29.947+08:002017-03-12T15:31:29.947+08:00If the computers were hacked then the scientists w...If the computers were hacked then the scientists who did the testing must have discovered this soon afterwards. How do you explain than none of them ever talked about this? I am also not aware of any of the three laboratories requesting to test the unused sample.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com