Shroud of Turin

Rating:
Summary: Secrets revealed: a case for the Holy Shroud
Review: An excellent apologetic view of the Bible, this 1995 video uses factual and evidential findings of Shroud proponent experts in an attempt to answer several skeptical hypotheses, which attack the Shroud's authenticity. Introducing Walter McCrone, a microchemist, and outspoken skeptic, McCrone announces that the Shroud is an absolute fake. Skeptics believe that the Shroud is a fake because it has no clear history prior to the middle ages (1300's). Not true say the filmmakers, ancient manuscripts attempt to trace its historic trail: Jerusalem to Edessa to Constantinople in 944. From there it travels to Athens in 1205 to France in 1353 and finally to Turin in 1578. By the 3rd C., the 'Mandilian' of Edessa (Shroud) became the universally accepted prototype for all subsequent Christian art bearing some 250 points of congruence. A 1389 bishop's reference to the Shroud as being a forgery is considered suspect in that it is unsigned and the alleged investigation at the time it cites cannot be documented. McCrone disputes that significant telltale pollen exists on the Shroud to authenticate its origin. Overwhelming acceptance of identification of 58 separate pollens, 41 of which directly tie the Shroud to Jerusalem, Edessa, and Constantinople and 28 flower types found on the Shroud contradict McCrone's view. McCrone says that he found paint pigment on the Shroud proving that it is a fake. Shroud proponents point out that the pigment found is iron oxide which is found equally all over the cloth and X-ray shows that it is not found just on the image. 92 other recognized professional artists concur that the image cannot be duplicated, even today, and scientific radiation analysis confirms that the level of 'pigment' is no more than that of 'dust' on the cloth. VP 8 image resonance differentiates between two-dimensional and the three-dimensional imagery on the Shroud. McCrone did not find blood on the Shroud, however, several other noted experts did. In fact, it was typed as human AB containing billyrubin, which can only be caused by jaundice or trauma. During the 1978 STURP tests, five days of extensive testing in 50 disciplines resulted in 150,000 man-hours testing over 7 years. While no other STURP test found credible evidence that the Shroud was a man-made forgery, carbon dating in 3 countries concluded that the Shroud dated to 1260-1390 suggesting a forgery. Modern Shroud experts question the findings as singular, unreliable, contaminated and question the labs' failure to follow prescribed testing procedures. They point out materials that are known to create false carbon 14 tests (Mollusk and Bristle pine), they show that the known control samples (3,000 year old mummy wraps), tested and re-tested a 1000 years off and that the labs violated 14 test procedures in their analysis. The program introduces new theorem from Moscow which suggest that the wax and fat rendered out in the cloth's original bleaching as well as carbon 14 impregnated into the cloth in the 1532 fire would skew any carbon dating, calculating the real age of the Shroud to be 1900 years old. The film concludes that most experts agree that the image was made in a short period of time, in a radiated up and down fashion and that it was made in contact with a 3 dimensional image. Experts state that the negative image is most like radiation caused by lightening and that there is still no known way to duplicate it. The narrator then asks us, if with everything else in Christ's life witnessed, is it not reasonable to assume that the resurrection would be documented?