It is hypothesised that the sampled area was a medieval repair which was conducted by "invisible reweaving".
Since the C14 dating at least four articles have been published in scholarly sources contending that the samples used for the dating test may not have been representative of the whole shroud.
The idea of scientifically dating the shroud had first been proposed in the 1960s, but permission had been refused because the procedure at the time would have required the destruction of too much fabric (almost 0.05 sq m ≅ 0.538 sq ft). P.), which involved about 30 scientists of various religious faiths, including non-Christians. Testore performed the weighting operations while Riggi made the actual cut.
The development in the 1970s of new techniques for radio-carbon dating, which required much lower quantities of source material, prompted the Catholic Church to found the Shroud of Turin Research Project (S. Also present were Cardinal Ballestrero, four priests, archdiocese spokesperson Luigi Gonella, photographers, a camera operator, Michael Tite of the British Museum, and the labs' representatives.
On 12 December 2003, Rogers received samples of both warp and weft threads that Prof.
Luigi Gonella claimed to have taken from the radiocarbon sample before it was distributed for dating.
She has rejected the theory of the "invisible reweaving", pointing out that it would be technically impossible to perform such a repair without leaving traces, and that she found no such traces in her study of the shroud.
Prof H E Gove, former professor emeritus of physics at the University of Rochester and former director of the Nuclear Structure Research Laboratory at the University of Rochester, helped to invent radiocarbon dating and was closely involved in setting up the shroud dating project.
Shredding the samples would not solve the problem, while making it much more difficult and wasteful to clean the samples properly.As reported in Nature, Professor Bray of the Instituto di Metrologia 'G.Colonetti', Turin, "confirmed that the results of the three laboratories were mutually compatible, and that, on the evidence submitted, none of the mean results was questionable." Although the quality of the radiocarbon testing itself is unquestioned, criticisms have been raised regarding the choice of the sample taken for testing, with suggestions that the sample may represent a medieval repair fragment rather than the image-bearing cloth.The main part of the shroud does not contain these materials." He speculated that these products may have been used by medieval weavers to match the colour of the original weave when performing repairs and backing the shroud for additional protection.Based on this comparison Rogers concluded that the undocumented threads received from Gonella did not match the main body of the shroud, and that in his opinion: "The worst possible sample for carbon dating was taken." As part of the testing process in 1988, Derbyshire laboratory in the UK assisted the Oxford University radiocarbon acceleration unit by identifying foreign material removed from the samples before they were processed.