And even more than that, in the 1970s, NASA scientists discovered that it was a 3D terrain map, encoded in 2 dimensions. Their terrain analyzer was probably a lot like the one Leonardo da Vinci had.
Just one example:
The Shroud of Turin didn't get much publicity prior to the 19th Century because it wasn't subject to the scrutiny of modern technology. What changed this was the advent of photography in the 19th Century. When the Shroud was photographed for the first time, it became clear that the Shroud itself is a photographic negative. For anyone to believe that someone in the Middle Ages fabricated such a thing -- hundreds of years before photography was even invented -- requires an enormous leap of faith (pun intended) that can't be supported by objective assessment of the subject.
A lot of energy has been expended trying to duplicate the Shroud with methods that would have been available to a medieval forger. None that I have seen are persuasive. Which is why I tend to think the Shroud is authentic.
If the Shroud is ever successfully replicated, I expect it will be the result of some very simple method that everyone has simply overlooked. But what that could be, I cannot imagine.
Look into what was called a ‘’camera obscura’’. An early kind of photographic device sometimes used by Da Vinci.
And even more than that, in the 1970s, NASA scientists discovered that it was a 3D terrain map, encoded in 2 dimensions. Their terrain analyzer was probably a lot like the one Leonardo da Vinci had.