[Thatcherite]

You are woefully ignorant of the C-14 dating of the Turin Shroud. Note I didn't say all scientists are woefully ignorant, just you.

I wasn't aware that some scientists regard the shroud dating as contentious.

I stand corrected. (Don't hold your breath waiting for any creationist to admit that they got anything wrong, that's the major difference between the participants in this debate)

[lepton]

I wasn't aware that some scientists regard the shroud dating as contentious.

It is contentious because there are several pieces of evidence (such as manufacturing process), and some of them flatly contradict the dating, though some contradictions have plausible explanations. The shroud is not really an optimal subject for that kind of dating, having been handled, kissed, soaked, burned, subjected to heavy smoke from non-contemporary materials, and kept in an open environment for centuries...and is too thin to take core samples from. Even further, it appears that the dating was done on a patch, not the main part of the cloth.

[shubi]

The main thing I see that makes the shroud impressive is the image. No one has been able to figure out how it got on there.

It was definitely not painted. There was one scientist who said he found pigment, but it seems it was dropped by artists copying the shroud image. There is no pigment on the image fibers.

I don't know of any other shrouds from any era that contain an image like this. It may be that this image is not Jesus. That will probably never be satisfactorily confirmed.

There is evidence that it came from Jesus time. One of the most striking was finding certain pollen that could only come from the Jerusalem area. If the shroud is a fraud, it is a very good one. It shows details of crucifixion that would not be known by medieval forgers.