Carbon dating is somewhat accurate because we are able to determine what the ratio was in the unobservable past to a certain extent.
Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly. The blind-test method was abandoned, because the distinctive three-to-one herringbone twill weave of the shroud could not be matched in the controls, and it was therefore still possible for a laboratory to identify the shroud sample.The labs were also each given three control samples (one more than originally intended), that were: and communicated their results to the British Museum.On September 28, 1988, British Museum director and coordinator of the study Michael Tite communicated the official results to the Diocese of Turin and to the Holy See.Unfortunately, we aren't able to reliably date artifacts beyond several thousand years.
Scientists have tried to extend confidence in the carbon dating method further back in time by calibrating the method using tree ring dating. In order for carbon dating to be accurate, we must know what the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 was in the environment in which our specimen lived during its lifetime.during the industrial revolution more carbon-12 was being produced offsetting the ratio a bit). lack of blindness in the measurements is a rather insubstantial reason for disbelieving the result." (t)he Church must respond to the challenge of those who want it to stop the process, who would want us to show that the Church fears the science. that radiocarbon measurements on the shroud should be performed blind seem to the author to be lacking in merit; … group expected to perform the radiometric examination under its own aegis and after the other examinations had been completed, while the laboratories considered radio-carbon dating to be the prime test, which should be completed at the detriment of other tests, if necessary.