Watched most of the Discovery broadcast and found it interesting without finding it particularly offensive. Of course, the overriding implied suggestion that Jesus may not have been ressurected was downplayed. The facts of the matter, however, are somewhat interesting. A mathematician calculated the odds of the find being anything other than that of the historic Jesus at about 60,000 to 1 (maybe it was 6,000 to 1, I'm not all that sure right now). But, whatever the odds, 60,000 or 6,000, some attention needs to be given to that finding. It was the most persuasive conclusion in the entire broadcast. Don't know if you are a gambler or not, but 6,000 to 1 is a pretty good gamble. I've made money on odds far shorter than that! :)
Statistics lie and liars figure.
The first indication of deception (by the claim of the odds the figure isn't the body of our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus are something like 6,000/60,000 to one) is that for the statisitcs to be that simple, it should be more convincing to simply state the variables being multiplied together to produce such a statistical probability.
By no means have the cultural implications of Christ's appearance and Resurrection been enumerated to produce any such probability without significant error (by several orders of magnitude).
It would be like taking all the male first names in English and deducing an equal likelihood that any particular male baby will have a particular name. If the bodies in the tomb are from the same time frame, it is probably more realistic to consider many believers from that age may have renamed their entire families after their perception of a Holy family with the anticipation they might inherit more in the resurrection of their families, which might not be from their own control, but by the work of angels.
IMHO, a more noteworthy hypothesis would be that many families from that era renamed themselves after Jesus Christ, the disciples and nearest associates.