it's more likely that the imprint was made the way kaputnik stated, as for carbon dating it is likely the shroud is older than 1200 ad simple becuase they carbon dated the edge of the shroud, which had been touched by many people, if they had sampled the inside then the result would be diffrent. As for the carbon dating infalibbilty even though it can go wrong, carbon dating is inaccruate as a carbon -14 atom only decays every 1400 years or so, therefore the answer can only be rounded to this number anyway. plus i don't think it was a hoax as some of you have suggested, someone didn't create this thinking that in the 20th and 21st centuries people will think it was the shroud of Jesus, as no one actually knows what jesus looks like, we just presume he has beard as there was no razors in that time.

actually, there must have been some razors, because in the story of samson, his hair was cut off. they could have very easily applied similar technology to remove facial hair follicles.

ok so maybe jesus didn't have a beard, the point still stands we still don't know if that imprint is jesus or just some random bloke, in fact it's more than likley it's a crusader.

i just think it's important that we as scientists keep open minds to various possibilities. and i also think as christians it's important that we try to understand others before we ridicule them, to make sure that they are in fact worth ridiculing and we don't end up being roman.

I don't know if it's a fake or not, but the Vatican have created many fake, an example is the "Constantin Donation", a document that gives to the vatican the land around Rome, but we discoveried that it's was a fake to cover the real donation of this land by a Longobard king, the Vatican needed to prove its theory during the Medieval Age so many reliques are only a piace of wood from the roman age, I've never seen the Shroud but I know that 2 years ago 2 fireman were killed during a fire in the church, i hope they didn't die for a fake.... :/

the shroud doesn't serve any tangible purpose that i see of though. it's at best a representation and reminder of an idea. that man can rise above the grade and care for others in a selfless way, without ungodly amounts of blood shed(thank you very much, mel gibson, now go rot). so whether or not it's authentic shouldn't matter. seeing as it represents an idea of +20 intangibility.

There is another possible explanation for the inaccurate carbon dating.

Scientists believe that, back in the 15th century, the shroud suffered some fire damage, which is why it has the holes and burns in it today. They believe that the fire could easily have deposited some newer carbon atoms on the cloth, thus throwing off the results of the carbon dating tests.

I think herein lies the answer to the question - if the Vatican for one minute believed that it was not faked, they would be in there like a shot claiming that it proves the existence of Jesus. Which Church wouldn't? It's not often you can provide absolute proof of your religious beliefs.



I also think that firedoor may be correct about the crusader theory. The face is quite western european in appearance. It was also quite common for Europeans at the time to have long hair and beards. To me the face doesn't look particularly Middle Eastern.

I don't think it could be 100% proven that it is the face of Jesus anyway, as even if the cloth does date from that era, what proof is there that it really is his face? Of course, if it was possible to extract his DNA from the shroud we could... oh yes, he didn't have any children. Unless you listen to the other theories that are out there...

jesus clearly couldn't have had kids. it works like this.
1.) jesus is a super cool guy and doesn't act like a jerk to anyone
2.) jesus knew in advance he was going to be A) crucified and go top side when his brief revisit after the death thing.
3.) people who leave their kids to their mother are jerks to their kids and they're wives
SO from this we can conclude several things.
jesus, knowing about 2 and following 1 had to avoid being 3 so he couldn't have had kids. QED

Hey. I just want to apologize ahead of time if I'm doing this wrong because this is my first time on a forum. I was looking up information on the Shroud of Turin because I am doing a report on it for my religion class. I found it really interesting to look at all of your different view-points on the subject. I for one, am not really sure on whether it's real or fake. I have read from numerous sources saying why the Shroud would be legitimate, and why it would not. I am Catholic, and there is no question that I believe that Jesus was real, but I am not positive that the Shroud is real. The Shroud is just a very difficult subject, and all of you who have said something, well, all of what all of you have said has made sense on both sides of the discussion. I don't really have much more to say, but I will keep checking here for any updates, this is actually a pretty fascinating topic. lol.

_VJ