1898: The Shroud was photographed for the first
time. These first pictures led to the discovery that the image on the cloth is actually a
negative. The image
becomes positive in a photographic
negative. This discovery startled the scientific community and stimulated worldwide
interest.

1931: Guisseppe Enrie photographed the Shroud again with more advanced film
technology confirming
that the Shroud is indeed a negative
image. Copies of Enrie's photos were circulated throughout the world prompting more
scientific inquiry
and interest.

1950: Dr. Pierre Barbet, a prominent French Surgeon, published A Doctor at
Calvary documenting
15 years of medical research on the
Shroud image. He described the physiology and pathology of the man on the Shroud
as "anatomically
perfect".

1973: Max Frei, a noted Swiss criminologist, was given permission to take dust
samples from the
Shroud that contained much pollen. He
discovered 22 pollen species from plants that are unique to areas around
Constantinople and Edessa,
and 7 pollen species from plants
common only in Israel. The pollen trail appears to corroborate the historical trail.

1975: Air Force scientists John Jackson and Eric Jumper, using a VP-8 Image Analyzer
designed for
the space program, discovered the Shroud
image contained encoded 3-D data not found in ordinary reflected light
photographs. This discovery
indicated that the cloth must have
wrapped a real human figure at the time the image was formed.

1978: The Shroud was on public exhibit for the first time since 1933 and was
displayed for six weeks.
At the close of the exhibition, 24
scientists comprising the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP) analyzed
the Shroud for
five continuous days (122 hours) working in
shifts around the clock.

1980: National Geographic magazine published a landmark article on the Shroud
further propelling
the cloth into the science limelight
calling it "One of the most perplexing enigmas of modern times".

1980: This same year, microscopist Walter McCrone who was not part of the
Shroud Project was
given several fibers to analyze. After finding
iron oxide particles and a single particle of vermilion paint, he broke ranks with
the Shroud scientists
who had agreed to make all findings
public the following year. McCrone proposed that the Shroud was a painting of
red ochre paint created
from iron oxide particles suspended in a
thin binder solution. However McCrone's findings in no way agreed with any
of the highly sophisticated
tests conducted by two dozen other
scientists. His claims have all been dismissed. It turns out the iron oxide is a natural
result of soaking
the linen for days (retting) where iron
ions from the water attach to the fibers and oxidize. The particles are randomly
distributed over
the entire cloth.

1981: After three years analyzing the data The Shroud of Turn Research Project
(STURP) made their
findings public at an international
conference in New London, CT. All the scientists agreed upon the following
statement: "We
can conclude for now that the Shroud image
is that of a real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product
of an artist. The
blood stains are composed of hemoglobin
and give a positive test for serum albumin."

1988: The Shroud was carbon dated by three laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and
Arizona. They indicated
a date range from between 1260 to
1390 indicating the cloth to be only about 700 years old. This earth shattering
news seemed to contradict
the conclusions of STURP that gave
support to the Shroud's possible authenticity.

1997: Avinoam Danin, prominent Israeli Botanist and a professor at Hebrew
University confirmed
the presence of flower images on the
Shroud. He verified 28 different pollen species and/or plant images. Many are from
plants that grow
only around Jerusalem.

2002: The Shroud was restored to remove charred debris from the fire of 1532
to aid in the cloth’s
preservation. All the burns and patches
from the 1532 fire were removed. The shroud was attached to a new backing cloth
as well.

2004: Textile expert Mechthild Flury-Lemberg, revealed that the stitching of a
seam on the Shroud
that runs the entire length known as the
side strip is typical of Jewish burial shrouds found in Masada, Israel.

2004: Chemical research on image
fibers offers clues
as to how the image was formed. The
entire cloth is covered with a razor thin layer of carbohydrates that adhered to the
linen after being
soaked in a soap weed detergent as part of

an ancient manufacturing process. Something has interacted with this carbo-layer
resulting in a discoloration
of the cloth near or in direct contact
with the body and is what causes the image to be visible on the cloth.

2005: Thermal Chemist, Ray Rogers, followed up on new spectroscopic data showing
the material
of the corner cut for carbon dating may
be different from the rest of the Shroud. He obtained thread samples from the
C-14 corner and
thread samples from the interior of the
Shroud. Additional micro-chemical and spectroscopic tests showed the
samples were not the
same. Results published in a peer-reviewed
journal confirmed initial concerns. The sample cut for C-14 dating appears to be
from a medieval
reweave instead of the original shroud.
"The radiocarbon sample was not part of the original cloth of the Shroud of
Turin. The radiocarbon
date was thus not valid for determining the true age of the shroud.” The carbon labs violated the
original sampling protocol.
Three different samples were to be cut;
instead only one sample was used. Ignoring caution from archaeologists, they
cut the sample from
the most handled area of the cloth, the
outside corner edge exactly where it had been grabbed and held by Church authorities
for numerous
public exhibitions. It was an area that
had the most potential for contamination, damage and repair.

2011: European researchers with the ENEA were able replicate the depth and coloration
of the
Shroud image using a 40 nanosecond burst
from an UV excimer laser. This is the first time any aspect of the image has been
reproduced using
light.

2013: Researchers with Padua University in Italy, using multiple samples from
other linens of a
known age ranging from the current era to
3000 BC, were able to develop a predictable rate of chemical and mechanical decay.
Comparing fibers
from the Shroud, they determined an
estimated date range of 280 BC to 220 AD.

Summary
of Key Facts:

Tests
performed by STURP:

Particle analysis

Chemical analysis

Blood analysis

Photo microscopy

Spectroscopy

X-ray radiography

Infra-red thermography

X-ray fluorescence spectrometry

Photo scans from infrared to ultra-violet

And more

Results:

No inorganic pigments present

No substances manually applied to cloth

No artistic substances are on the cloth

No collagen binder as would be used with paint

Blood tests positive for heme, bile, serum

albumin and other blood components. The blood

is AB positive with human DNA.

“The blood marks seen on the shroud are consistent with a contact transfer
to the cloth of blood
clot exudates that would have resulted
from major wounds inflicted on a man who died in the position of crucifixion.” - Dr.
Al Adler

Image
Characteristics:

Purely superficial -- penetrates only top 2 micro-

fibers. Does not penetrate the cloth.

Yellowing of image is uniform in intensity

No capillary action apparent

No cementing of fibers to each other

No substances between threads

No directionality to image

No outline to image

The image is a negative

Contains distance information similar to a

topographical map.

STURP
Conclusion:

“There are no chemical or physical methods known which can account for the
totality of the image,
nor can any combination of physical,
chemical, biological, or medical circumstances explain the image adequately. We can
conclude for
now that the Shroud image is that of a real
human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The
blood stains are composed
of hemoglobin and also give a positive
test for serum albumin.”

Thats utterly irrelevant. Nobody has ever claimed that the pollen is 200 years old .. the post of the pollen samples was to show that the shroud has come from or been though the area of Jerusalem at some stage , and since the vast amount of pollen samples are from that area is is a piece of evidence to helps us to evaluate its origins.. Its not likely based on this evidence that the shroud was made in Europe

David , the existence of relics that are near impossible to verify have no correlation to the shroud of Turin .

The shroud is unique ...totally unique

You said that you think its a waste of time jostling between factions on this forum !!!!

i personally think its important get the facts out there and sift through all the irrelevant stuff in the process so that we can come to better understanding

FYI
there cannot be any more radio carbon dating on the shroud as it has been damaged again by smoke from a fire in recent times . I believe that the shroud has also been treated chemically too which means that there couldn't be any more testing regardless of the smoke damage

that is a shame really

Regardless of whether one believes the shroud is the burial cloth of Christ makes no difference whatsoever

I agree with that. Whether you believe it is, or I believe it isn't, is quite irrelevant.

Why does the shroud even exist at all

I could guess, but only the person who made it can answer that question with certainty.

You need to read all of them ????

That was my question.

Really Doug ???
You need to read all of them ????

So my question would be ;
Why does the shroud even exist at all , if not to give credence to the person of Christ ..

The RCD is invalid because the RCD sample doesn't correlate the overall body of the shroud as it was a "repaired piece of cloth ..
That is a crucial factor in determining whether an RCD date can be determined as representative for the overall body of the shroud .
Since the Body of the shroud MUST be older than the REPAIRED section of the RCD sample , then That alone invalidates the RCD ...
Regardless of whether one believes the shroud is the burial cloth of Christ makes no difference whatsoever
Skeptics can no longer appeal to the RCD as evidence of fakery ..
One of the important factors in dating the shroud is in the weave of the fabric itself which absolutely correlates to a first century herringbone weave not consistent with the RCD sample .
That also adds further damage to the credibility of the RCD ..

Ray Rogers ultimately has destroyed the RCD ..

The most that he could have proved was that the age of the shroud is still unknown. That is a very far cry from proving that it covered the body of a man who was crucified 2,000 years ago.