[JungleGoat77]

Unless they can reproduce all the characteristics of the Shroud their theory is just a theory.
A better book might be the first half of
The Sign, by art historian Thomas de Wesselow where he disassembled all the doubting theories; the second half is his own strange theory that what the disciples and others saw after the resurrection was just the Shroud. Doesn’t explain Jesus walking to Emmaus.
https://www.amazon.com/Sign-Shroud-Turin-Secret-Resurrection/dp/0525953655/ref=sr_1_1
The Shroud sure has curious effects on some people.

[AFB-XYZ]

Wasn’t there human hemoglobin found in the Shroud? And various pollens from first-century Judea? And what about the photographic-negative quality of the image, not to mention the anatomical accuracy of the nail holes through the wrists, vs. the palms?

[SkyDancer]

Spent three and a half days at a Shroud seminar hosted by noted scientist that concluded it could not be a 14th. century fraud. There is no way people back then had the science to produce something like the Shroud (biological or artistically).

What do you see? A smudge. You have to stand back 13 to 18 feet to see any image and that image is a negative image something not known in their day; secondly in a painting or drawing the closer you get to an image the sharper it becomes. The closer you get to the Shroud image it just becomes smudges.

The Shroud also possesses photographic-negative properties first discovered in 1898, that on the “positive image” clearly show every gruesome, agonizing, torment endured by the “man.” Additionally, the Shroud displays three-dimensional “distance information” resembling a topographical map but within the cloth’s two-dimensional image of the man.

The Shroud also possesses photographic-negative properties first discovered in 1898, that on the “positive image” clearly show every gruesome, agonizing, torment endured by the “man.” Additionally, the Shroud displays three-dimensional “distance information” resembling a topographical map but within the cloth’s two-dimensional image of the man.

There's lots more including the fact that the dating source was taken from a repair made in the 14th. century and not the actual Shroud itself.

[Hootowl]

The author of this book has not kept up with the research.