The current state of scholarship is that the Shroud is a medieval forgery, and attempts by true believers to refute that have been found singularly unimpressive, as those distillations of contemporary thinking about the matter in 252 illustrate. That's peer review. The historical record points to a 14th century date, as does the scientific record. If the Church ever allows a further Carbon-14 test on another piece of the cloth it'll just repeat the 1988 results, though I don't expect the excuse-mongering will ever stop.
What part of "the tested samples were not the same as the main body of the shroud" do you fail to understand?
You have ignored everything I have posted to you about the invalid samples. Did you even read it? I don't think so. The scientists who reviewed the data found it compelling. Those are scientists with no axe to grind in this argument.
I also told you that an unauthorized C14 test was performed on a thread from the main body of the Shroud... and returned a date consistent with mid 1st Century, plus or minus 50 years. The large range of confidence is caused by the fact that the sample was very small.
Harry Gove, the inventor of the process used by all three labs in the 1988 test, when presented with the evidence developed independently by Drs. Rogers and Brown that the samples were compromised, contaminated with non-shroud material added by skillful repairs most likely done in the 16th century, calculated that given the observed percentages of contamination with repair material from the 16th Century, the original material mixed in would have had to have been First Century, give or take 100 years, to produce the ages reported in the tests.
No doubt you'll say your 14th Century hoaxer would have had the foresight to obtain some original 1st century linen cloth to use for his hoax in anticipation of the Carbon 14 tests. Some skeptics have actually claimed that.
You deliberately refuse to see what is before your nose.... Your mind is closed.