From Dr. Gene Scott/Shroud of Turin/number VF-1213/June 6, 2000
______________________________________________________________________
As reported in the Journal radio carbon in 1986 scientists used C-14 to date an Egyptian mummy linen....as well as two Peruvian linen cloths....they knew the age of these they dug them out of graves.
" It demonstrated that the method is somewhat wanting in accuracy with regard to linen. The Egyptian mummy linen the dates ranged from 3440 to 4517 spanning eleven hundred years. The known age of the cloth was 3000 BC. The closest date C-14 could produce was 2528 requiring a calibration of 472 years to correct it. "
" Potentially the most damaging single piece of evidence to controvert the 1988 test results comes from the reported disclosure that there was a secret dating of the Shroud conducted at a California nuclear accelerator facility in 1982. Separate ends of a single thread (little smaller than a postage stamp) were dated with one end dating 200 AD and the other end of the same thread dating 1000 AD....the wide divergence in dating on the same thread should be alarming to those who consider the 1988 test definitive. " END Journal QUOTE
Point:
C-14 is not an accurate method to date linen.
From the First quote:
______________________________________________________________________
We have hundreds of papyrus manuscripts of Greek pagan literary texts from this period and again hundreds of carefully written papyrus documents that show the same types of handwriting.
______________________________________________________________________
Is this not the "Curve of Knowns" you ask for ?
Are you saying the author of the First quote is making the claim up ?
Suppose the First quote claims are accurate. Whats to be afraid of ?
Does it evidence something you have argued against ? Suppose John wrote the fragment, isn't he still a liar/fraud/deceiver ? Whats the stakes/harm here ?