Italian scientists have claimed to have reproduced the apparent image of Jesus on the Shroud of Turin by wrapping a person in linen, rubbing him with ochre, and putting blood on the result. But now a group of pro-shroud experts is casting doubt on that casting of doubt. From the Christian Telegraph, Experts question scientist’s claim of reproducing Shroud of Turin:
Dr. Jackson first questioned the technique used by Garlaschelli’s team, taking issue with the method of adding blood after aging the cloth. Jackson explained that he has conducted “two independent observations that argue that the blood features on the shroud” show “that the blood was on it first, then the body image came second.”
Dr. Keith Propp, a physicist who is also a colleague of Jackson’s, told CNA that while Garlaschelli’s shroud “does create an image that could’ve been done in medieval times,” there are a many things that “are not consistent with what the actual shroud shows us.”
For example, he continued, we know that the blood contacted the shroud before the body “because there’s no image beneath the shroud.” He added that this image pattern would be difficult to duplicate “because it would ruin the blood stains.”
Another area concern for the scientists is the three dimensionality of the shroud.
Propp explained that while Garlaschelli’s cloth does have some aspects of light and dark to create a three-dimensional perspective, “it’s nowhere near as sophisticated as the shroud” and that “it misses out on the accuracy and subtleties that are in the actual image.”
Dr. Jackson from the Turin Shroud Center also touched on the same point, saying, “The shroud’s image intensity varies with” the distances in between the cloth and the body. While he admitted that the images of Garlaschelli’s shroud on the internet look authentic, when taken from a 3-D perspective, “it’s really rather grotesque.” . . .
Garlachelli’s technique has also received criticism from other experts. One scientist from the Shroud Science Group, a private forum of about 100 scientists, historians and researchers provided CNA with some of the critiques made in the forum.
One English-speaking expert explained that the blood used on the Shroud of Turin is not whole blood. “They didn’t just go out and kill a goat and paint the blood on the cloth. The blood chemistry is very specific,” he said explaining that the blood is from “actual wounds.”
He added that most of the blood on the shroud flowed after death. “The side wound and the blood that puddles across the small of the back are post-mortem blood flows,” he said, adding that blood flowing after death “shows a clear separation of blood and serum.”
Propp added, “In some ways, it comes out better than most others I’ve seen before. Still there are too many things – the shroud is more than just the image.”
I know, I know. Our faith comes from the Word, not relics. Still, I’m intrigued. Carbon-dating has the shroud originating in the Middle Ages, though some pro-shroud advocates have questioned that also. Are they saying that there is blood on the Shroud? That is, the blood of Jesus? I’d like to see the DNA sequencing of THAT sample. (If it showed only a female line, that would be definitive!) I know, I know. If I want the blood of Christ, I should go to Holy Communion. But a historical event, such as the transformation that took place at the moment of the Resurrection, could leave behind evidence, so this is worth studying.