THE SHROUD OF TURIN

A possible explanation on how the shroud could have been created during medieval times

Sponsored link.

One explanation of the Shroud's manufacturing process:

In our love affair with the number two, many people allow only two alternative explanations for the Shroud: either the shroud dates back to 1st century CE Palestine, or it is a forgery. The overlook the third possibility: that it was created by an artist as a religious image, an icon.

Many scientists have accepted the Carbon-14 dating measurements as proof of a 13^th or 14^th century origin of the linen. But they have failed miserably in their attempts to explain how the image was created by a medieval forger or religious artist:

Believers in a medieval origin for the shroud need an explanation of how an image could have been produced, using processes, techniques and materials available to a person in the 13^th or 14^th century. Wilson likened the problem to that of the Gordian knot -- a knot that allegedly cannot be undone, except by cutting a thread. He also draws an analogy to the Roman astronomer Ptolomy's system of planetary motion which grew to involve an immensely complex system of epicircles built upon epicircles. It collapsed when Copernicus' theory of a sun-centered solar system was suggested. ₁ The latter was a simple concept which was a much better fit to all of the observations.

Wilson appears to have had a flash of intuition about the Shroud. He found a possible method that did not involve an artist painting the image on linen at all. It involved simply painting an ordinary image on glass with ordinary paints, and using sunlight to transfer the image to a piece of linen. !

Wilson suggests a relatively simple process:

Someone during medieval times could have accidentally found a piece of dirty glass placed on top of a piece of paper or a cloth and exposed to the sun. The resultant image could have suggested the avove process as a method by which a religious image could be created on linen.

Wilson actually tried to duplicate this process. He comments: "Sitting and looking at photos of my own faux shrouds lying next to photos of the original, it is obvious, to my eyes at least, that my production is far inferior. Mine is a photo negative. It is a photo negative that looks vaguely human. But it lacks some of the finesse of the original....But the principle has been demonstrated. A painting on glass produces a photo negative." Presumably, further experimentation will produce a better simulation of the Shroud's image.

One explanation for some of the details of the image:

There are two features of the Shroud image which have seemed difficult to explain: