[weikel]

Its possible the radiocarbon dating is inaccurate but the fact that its dated to the 14th century when a lot of phony relics were made makes this a lot less likely.

[Alberta's Child]

The carbon dating may be very accurate, but because of what the shroud has gone through it may be "reading" the wrong things. You have to remember that parts of the shroud were burned in a fire sometime around the 13th century (if you look at the dark splotches on the cloth you can see how the shroud was folded up and one corner was scorched), and there were apparently some attempts to repair the fabric afterward.

[Gargantua]

Thanks for clearing this up for us, we'll inform the experts who aren't aware of your difinitive conclusion.

[Woodman]

I give you a couple of links to look at. I am not saying what they should prove to you one way or another, just asking that you look.

"Nuclear Medicine and Its Relevance to the Shroud of Turin"
"Is The Shroud of Turin a Medieval Photograph? A Critical Examination of the Theory"

[cmak9]

"Its possible the radiocarbon dating is inaccurate but the fact that its dated to the 14th century when a lot of phony relics were made makes this a lot less likely." Did you really mean to say this? So...it's possible the carbon dating is inaccurate, but the since the possibly (I say probably) inaccurate carbon dating puts it in the 14th century, then it is probably a fake? If the carbon dating is inaccurate, IT MEANS NOTHING, doesn't it?