'); } -->
The Sept. 8 letter "Dating the shroud" accused unspecified scientists of some extremely bogus ideas.
The writer claimed that there is a theory that such a thing as "newer carbon generated during fiery events." This is entirely bogus unless those "fiery events" occurred in solar and other radiation or in a so-called atom-smasher. Fires do not create new carbon; ask any physicist.
The writer also suggested that "powerful radiations [sic] from the resurrection event must have generated C-14 [Carbon-14, used in dating]." Pretty powerful radiation indeed! Again, ask any physicist. And where is the evidence that a "resurrection event" includes radiation of any kind?
Finally, the writer claimed that images of coins from around 31 AD imply a date close to 31 AD. Actually, they would imply a date on or after 31 AD; ask any archeologist. Such coins exist today, which is certainly after 31 AD.
I believe the letter used the term "scientist" loosely, perhaps only to mean "researcher." Such loose language is an insult to real scientists.
David Moffat
Chapel Hill
Get it all with convenient home delivery of The News & Observer.
The News & Observer is pleased to be able to offer its users the opportunity to make comments and hold conversations online. However, the interactive nature of the internet makes it impracticable for our staff to monitor each and every posting.
Since The News & Observer does not control user submitted statements, we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted on our website. In addition, we remind anyone interested in making an online comment that responsibility for statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not The News and Observer.
If you find a comment offensive, clicking on the exclamation icon will flag the comment for review by the administrators, we are counting on the good judgment of all our readers to help us.