Wow. You nailed all the key points.
Anyone who thinks some medieval forger could come up with all that — please private message me — I have a bridge in New York City that I need to sell..
Satan is a great deceiver. They said Jesus didn’t stand out in the crowd. With that long hair, he’d stick out like a sore thumb.
ON an old thread I wrote about the C-14 dating.
This is going from memory, and I’ll be Swordmaker will correct me if I’m wrong.
The samples were taken from the one area where everyone agreed samples should NOT be taken from: a section of the Shroud which had been repaired by a technique called “French Invisible Reweaving” (or. a name very similar to that, I’m going from memory). In that technique, new thread is gradually incorporated into the damaged original cloth, such that the % of new fiber gradually tapers from 100% down to 0%.
The samples were chosen from THAT portion of the Shroud; and further, the samples were taken along a straight line going from the edge (100% newer cloth) to the middle of the Shroud.
As I recall, the carbon dating results of each sample (each one given to a separate lab) were “C-14 apparent age, X years old +/- Y uncertainty” ... but the three labs’ results were outside of each others’ error bars.
Those results should have screamed either “systematic error” or “inhomogenity in the sample”.