"If you want to know if soemthing was done fraudulently, why not go to people who know who to commit fraud?"
I Read It and pointed out that magicians are experts in what might be termed "performance fraud" not "artistic" fraud. No one goes to a magician to determine if a Rembrandt or a Rodin work of art is a "fraud." Magicians are not called in to examine counterfeit money, documents, or photographs.
Magicians work by misdirection and engineering... not too useful when examining a static artifact. There is no "misdirection" associated with the Shroud.
I also pointed out that the magicians who have claimed to have duplicated the Shroud, Joe Nickell among them, produced ludicrous copies that only met one if any of the list of criteria established to successfully demonstrate duplication. All of their attempts involved daubing pigments despite the lack of pigments on the image areas of the original, searing wet cloth on a heated statue which produced images that fluoresced while the original does not, chemically treating the shroud to make it photosensitive and making it a photograph despite chemical tests showing no photosensitive chemicals or their derivitives on the shroud... and not one of these hypotheses and techniques had NOT already been thought of, and tested, by scientists in the preceding 100 years or so. Had anyone of these magicians produced a copy that met some of the criteria, I would want to talk to him.
If I wanted to explore and expose the fraudulent nature of a "performance" miracle such as "Psychic surgery," "Changing Water to Wine," "Psychokinesis movement of a matchbox in a bell jar," or "remote viewing," I will summon Joe Nickell (but I will check his sources diligently) or the Amazing Randi. The Shroud, however, is a static mystery... there IS no one standing behind the curtain... there is no hidden compartment... there is no sleight of hand... there is no false thumb... and there is no need for an expert in the use of any of them in studying the Shroud.