[EternalHope]

It is my opinion that this is near-definitive evidence that the Shroud is genuine.

Agreed.

No one has come up with anything remotely capable of explaining how a painter from the Middle Ages could have faked this kind of double image, or that needed this kind of enhancement to see. The other remarkable features of the shroud were sufficient IMHO, but this seems to seal the case.

However, I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ. Such a thing would have implications that are simply unacceptable to many people.

[polemikos]

However, I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ. Such a thing would have implications that are simply unacceptable to many people.

What I find especially humorous is that many hysterical denials will come from Fundamentalists decrying "false idols". What a world, what a world...

"And as a man was being buried, lo, a marauding band was seen and the man was cast into the grave of Eli'sha; and as soon as the man touched the bones of Eli'sha, he revived, and stood on his feet." -- 2 Kg 13:21 (RSV)

[orionblamblam]

> No one has come up with anything remotely capable of explaining how a painter from the Middle Ages could have faked this kind of double image

Hmmm. How about this: the painter painted both sides?

Not exactly challenging... just paint one side, hold up to the light, paint the other side. Easy.

[orionblamblam]

> I expect to see near hysterical denials that it is of Jesus Christ.

What I find funny is that any scientist who looks at the evidence and says, "Nah, it's a fake," will be hysterically described as being in hysterical denial.