Shroud Splits Scientists

SANTA FE, N.M.—No project in modern times has brought science and religion into closer contact than efforts to assess the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin. And the debate about the role of scientists in the project has been every bit as heated as the religious discussions. At the center of the controversy is a group of scientists that make up the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). Formed here in 1976, the 30 or so volunteers rely on private donations to conduct their work. Robert Dinegar, a retired physical chemist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, is one of the organizers of STURP. He is also an ordained Episcopal priest. Although Dinegar says that STURP members come from a diverse religious background that includes Catholics, Protestants, Jews and agnostics, outsiders say that the group's religious bias is strong enough to warrant its exclusion from the upcoming trials. Last fall Vatican officials agreed in principle to a battery of tests, including carbon-14 dating, on the relic that is held by many believers to be the burial cloth of Jesus. Scientists close to the work expect tests to begin as early as this month. According to the protocol pro posed in October, seven labs world wide will use advanced carbon-14 dating methods on minute shroud specimens. Results will be correlated by the British Museum, which will reveal a final average age. Because STURP has no facility to perform carbon-14 dating, the organization will not be involved directly in the dating. But the group hopes to conduct other experiments on the shroud's blood stains and fibers. In 1978 STURP attempted to analyze the famed image on the cloth, which according to Church tradition is an image of Christ's corpse. Although inconclusive, that examination inspired strong feelings of mistrust among some scientists. "We found there is no indication that the image on the Shroud of Turin was 'painted' on the cloth," said Dinegar. "Something caused the fibers of the cloth to lose water molecules, and that's why they've taken on a dark appearance …We have a feeling the image could be what it claims to be." But Marvin Mueller, a physicist at Los Alamos, is among those who have challenged this interpretation publicly in a series of articles. He believes other methods, especially artistic rubbing using a ferric oxide material, could explain the image. For Mueller, it is "an argument on a higher plane—an argument of physical laws and mathematical principles." Accepting a super natural explanation could change "the way we look at the world," he says. "Science has never had to frame a supernatural process." Mueller has mixed feelings about STURP's involvement in future tests. But he acknowledges that the group has been willing to listen to his arguments regarding the image. "Generally, their investigation was quite good," he said. And he credits Dinegar for his administrative and political expertise in helping to win approval for the up coming examinations. A Strong Belief Harry Gove, whose laboratory at the University of Rochester was among those chosen for the dating tests, said he "wouldn't touch it [the analysis] with a ten-foot pole" if STURP was involved. "The trouble is they're all people who actually have a pretty strong belief it's Jesus's shroud, and it bothers the hell out of me they're the only ones so far who've carried out any kind of scientific measurements," he said. Gove and Garman Harbottle, a senior chemist at Brookhaven National Laboratory who has been associated with STURP, as a skeptic, for 10 years, were refused access to the shroud in 1978. "It's very difficult for scientists to talk to Cardinals," Gove remembers. Harbottle hopes to participate in the upcoming dating trials. Al though he has tried to remain neutral in the debate about STURP, he admits that straddling the fence is at times uncomfortable. At a car bon-14 conference in Trondheim, Norway, in 1985, he recalled, "all the people interested in the Shroud of Turin were in the same room at the same time. And they almost came to blows." As both scientist and priest, Dinegar is accustomed to criticism such as Gove's. "I believe it was our scientific reputations that convinced the Cardinal Archbishop [of Turin] that we should be given the chance to investigate," Dinegar said about the 1978 tests. "I just want to find out what it is. Nobody's faith depends on it …I don't care which way it falls." Dinegar and other STURP members see no inherent conflict between science and religion. He describes his own role as "a scientist in both fields." Sides of a Coin "Science is a search for truth and knowledge," he said. "Physical science and religious science are two different aspects of the same field—the search for knowledge." But Dinegar maintains he wears only his scientist's hat during his work on the Shroud. "What physical science can do is give me more information about a religious object than if it was only approached from a religious side." Harbottle believes that whatever obstacles exist to the next round of tests will come from the scientific community rather than the Vatican. Besides the mistrust between believers and cynics, there is also competition among scientists for a role in the high-profile project. "The fundamental problem is personal egos," asserted Roger Morris, a physicist at Los Alamos who participated in the 1978 tests. Morris was hesitant to become involved at first, fearing the Vatican would try to influence results. But "I did not see that," he remembered. "What I saw was a lot of personal bickering because someone was excluded." Weisberg is a freelance writer in Santa Fe, N.M.

Shroud Splits Scientists

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of