[sphinx]

Obvious fakes are not a problem. The Shroud of Turin, however, is a unique object. So far, researchers have not been able to duplicate it. That's the puzzle.

I'm not a Shroud buff, but my recollection is that the modern revival of interest dates from the point in the late 19th or early 20th century when it was being photographed, and the photographer realized that the image appears to be the equivalent of a photographic negative. Pretty neat trick for some guy in a workshop somewhere in northern Europe in the 12th or 13th century. So: how would a medieval forger have achieved this, and many other curious effects, even if accidentally?

[Malesherbes]

I also am not a Shroud buff, but I have a couple of books on it and have followed the press on it in recent years.

I get some satisfaction from the fact that secular researchers have been unable to discredit it and that it defies any “scientific” explanations. It seems almost to be a cosmic taunt telling us that there is more to reality than our feeble science understands.