I'm going to Valleyfair with the kids all day, so I won't be able to respond in detail right now.
But your statement is quite literally point-by-point *wrong*.
The only explanation for such unwillingness to consider any of the points on this thread, is -- quite literally -- bigotry and stereotyping. "There go those gullible Christians again, blathering on about miraculous images. Let's go debunk it. See, here's an image we made by fakery. Therefore the Shroud is a fake. QED."
The only problem is, it is not being insisted by all those interested in the Shroud, that miracle had *anything* to do with it. There is a perfectly naturalistic mechanism for the formation of the image; and you need not even posit the Resurrection, since a theft of the body in order to further a conspiracy (as in Passover Plot) could separate the body from the linens.
The French were able to address some of the faults of prior attempts at forgery of an image on linen.
It can only explain in a hand-waving way "maybe if the image *were* a forgery, here's a guess as to how this kind of thing might have been done".
The French work is such that it does not pass any serious independent analysis -- it is fit only to deceive the easily-led. It does NOT mimic the actual physical and chemical characteristics of the Shroud as determined by rigorous scientific analysis.
So it doesn't even rise to the level of error. It is a mere non-sequitur.
Cheers!
The French work proves that the shroud could have been produced by forgers using techniques available during the middle ages when the shroud first appeared.