Again, this is all published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
We simply do not have enough reliable information to arrive at a scientifically rigorous conclusion.
I know the Pope has a lot of things on his plate but if Popes and Archbishops are giving lip service to research/new testing, he really needs to reevaluate the role of the Shroud in the church.
If new testing did not disprove the authenticity, it could bring a lot more people to Christianity.
Chemical analysis, all nicely peer-reviewed in scientific journals and subsequently confirmed by numerous chemists, shows that samples tested are chemically unlike the whole cloth.
It was probably a mixture of older threads and newer threads woven into the cloth as part of a medieval repair.
Yes, it is possible to create images that look similar.
But no one has created images that match the chemistry, peculiar superficiality and profoundly mysterious three-dimensional information content of the images on the Shroud.
We now have Barberis saying another C-14 test should be done. Louis conference, there is a lot of debate among researchers whether it should be done.In referring to Barberis, Joe is, I think, referring to SHROUD: TRACES OF BLOOD FROM THE "CARBON-14": WHAT DOES SCIENCE SAY, a Google Translation of an article, SINDONE, DALLE TRACCE EMATICHE AL "CARBONIO-14": COSA DICE LA SCIENZA in I favor retesting.Bill Meacham (The Rape of the Shroud) continues to advocate for it.There have been expositions in 1998, 2000, 2010 and the current one.A tremendous amount of time, energy and money have been spent in each of those.Even the famous Atheist Richard Dawkins admits it is controversial.Christopher Ramsey, the director of the Oxford Radiocarbon Laboratory, thinks more testing is needed. This is because there are significant scientific and non-religious reasons to doubt the validity of the tests.Popes have come to gaze on the Shroud; Benedict XVI said when he visited in 2010 that “we see, as in a mirror, our suffering in the suffering of Christ”. They refer to the 1987 Carbon-14 dating and say, “It’s medieval. That settles it.” But the believers bounce back, and year by year, as modern technology advances, more and more evidence accumulates which causes anyone who reads the research to be sceptical of the sceptics.The most recent claim – that the blood on the Shroud is from a torture victim – has re-opened the debate.Years ago, as a skeptic of the Shroud, I came to realize that while I might believe it was a fake, I could not know so from the facts.Now, as someone who believes it is the real burial shroud of Jesus of Nazareth, I similarly realize that a leap of faith over unanswered questions is essential.