It is a shame you are not open-minded. If you were, you would find out that many of the original scientific team was converted by working on the investigation of the Shroud.
If you claim this fraud, how can you explain that the shroud was made from "energy", according to the NASA/US Air Force test. Even more amazing is the fact that when NASA ran a series of tests, they found the Shroud was a 3-d image, not a 2-d.
Finally, from this testing, it was found that the eyes of the person buried had Pontius Pilate coins over the eyes of the man.
Other tests revealed pollen in the fabric of the cloth. This pollen was only found in Israel 2000 years ago, and is now exinct (the flowers).
But if you are to make the bold claim TO SIDE WITH THE IGNORANT AND BIASED MEDIA ABOUT THE SHROUD, then at least go to "www.shroud.com" and read some of the articles before believing the media (gobbling their garbage down, hook, line and sinker).
There is no excuse for someone to make claims if they have not even attempted to research the topic.
Finally, the Shroud was burned in a fire. FIRE EMITS CARBON, so this would skew the Carbon-14 dating. Additionally, because of the damage of the fire, the shroud was mended with NEW CLOTH. The mended area was probably given for the Carbon-14 dating.
Finally, there have been some very brilliant scientists come out and say how "flawed" the original carbon-14 dating is.
But then ignorance is bliss, so maybe you want to have bliss and stay ignorant of the facts.
If the Shroud is a fraud, there are many different scientific studies that would have to be refuted, including the very high tech one done by NASA and the US Air Force.
If it is a fraud, then how can you explain this being made from energy (my theory is that it is the energy of resurrection).
I am waiting for some sort of intelligent response.
I'd explain this by saying you have no idea what you are talking about. We'll leave aside matter-energy equivalence, since I doubt that is what you are breathlessly referring to.
Fire tends to emit all the original components, leaving the less volatile -- hence LEAVING a lot of carbon.
But nonetheless, simple chemical processes such as fire are unlikely to significantly differentiate between C14 and C12, so the results are hardly "skewed." To make a thing appear younger by C14 versus C12 analysis, you'd have to get rid of more C12 and keep more C14. Explain how fire does that, and explain in what degree it might do it.
As dumb as you might think the ancients were, 3D, i.e. statutes and scupltures, date back to the most ancient artifacts found -- 10's of thousands of years ago. The concept of "3D" was not invented the year you bounced off the turnip truck.