We can duplicate some aspects of the Shroud, but not all of them. . . And when we do, we can always find that the way we do them is distinguishable from the Shroud, so it’s NOT an accurate duplicate. For example we can create a terrain mapped 3D like image that in many ways that looks like the image on the Shroud. To do it we use a pigment that is VERY obvious on the cloth which stains the cloth. Looking at the Shroud we find NO pigment and no staining of the cloth. . . Only linen which has oxidized more than the background linen. Oops. Not duplicated.
Ok, let’s find a way to oxidize the cloth in a similar fashion. We do that. We can oxidize line using a maillard reaction. Fine. Oops. We cannot get the fine detail the Shroud evinces in the image. RATS. Foiled again.
Oh, and it also seeps into the fabric and changes deep into the fabric fibers. The shroud doesn’t show that. More fails.
How about we try heat. . . Ok, you can oxidize linen by heating it. . . Heat it too much and you char it. Charred linen fluoresces under an ultraviolet light. . . In fact, Linen that has been even oxidized enough to oxidize often fluoresces under an ultraviolet light. Our attempts fluoresce. .. the Shroud doesn’t. OOPS! Another fail.
Also, how do we get the heat to reach up to 20cms distance and attenuate properly to produce the image??? Oh, we can’t. Under computer enhancement on the Shroud, it is seen that the Man on the Shroud is circumcised. How did our 14th Century hoaxer DO that detail work at such subtlety???? We can’t, by ANY method.
What energy source attenuates in just 20cms to essentially nothing both up and down but not horizontally with laser like precision, thus seems to be completely collimated with essentially no side scatter? We can think of none. Maybe a light saber??? We haven’t invented one yet.
We can put the blood stains on the Shroud, but we’d have to do it BEFORE we get the image on the cloth, then put the image on, perfectly registered to the locations of the blood stains, because there is no image beneath the stains. This means the image was created post blood stains.
Medical practitioners have noted that the image on the Shroud shows things a mere image should not show, such as the teeth in the maxilla, both upper and lower, the orbital bone of the skull around the eyes, the fingers of the hand look too long because it’s showing the metacarpal bones of the hands. In other words, there are radiographic components to the images. We COULD do this today, but not instantly, and not with all other image components required to duplicate the Shroud as we observe it.
The skeptics do a superficial image that looks sorta like the Shroud and announce “Hey, everybody! Look! I’ve debunked the shroud by doing this modern recreation by doing X. . . It looks like it, if you squint your eyes. I’ve proved the Shroud is a hoax! If you use Cinnabar, and Elmer’s glue spread all over a naked body, and roll on a cloth spread on the floor, then shake it, it looks something like the Shroud on a good Tuesday in November, then the Shroud is a FAKE! FAKE! FAKE” and the news media beats a path to his door, he writes a exposé book, makes several tens of thousands of dollars from his fellow skeptics, maybe gets a History Channel special, and lots of CNN and MSNBC, CBS, NBC, and even NPR gigs to tell how Christianity itself is a HOAX, and appears on Nightline to demonstrate his technique with Michelle Obama. Whoopee.
So what if it’s all been done before and debunked before it was done.
“And stooping to look in, he [the ‘disciple Jesus loved’] saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus’head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself.”
” Under computer enhancement on the Shroud, it is seen that the Man on the Shroud is circumcised.”
Is this another we don’t know who did it, when, where and how since it is unpublished but told to you by two. high-uppers?