Stephen E. Jones

Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified: August 2007 (1)

[Home] [Updates] [Site map] [My Quotes; Shroud of Turin quotes: Unclassified, Classified] [My TheShroudofTurin blog]

The following are quotes added to my Shroud of Turin unclassified quotes in August 2007 (1). See copyright conditions at end.

[May, Jun, Jul, Aug (2), Sep , Oct, Nov, Dec]

1/08/2007
"The Turin Shroud is a linen cloth the color of old ivory measuring 4.4 by 1.1 m. It bears the faint front and 
back, head to head, imprint of a naked man. This remarkable image depicts all the stigmata of the crucifixion 
of Jesus Christ as described in the Bible. As a result, it is thought by many to be the actual burial cloth of 
Jesus. The shroud’s known history dates back to about the year 1357 when it was displayed in a church in 
Lirey, France. The shroud, or some version of it, eventually passed into the hands of the House of Savoy. 
The shroud was stored in a silver chest in a chapel in Chambery, France and in 1532 a fire raged through the 
chapel. Part of the chest melted and gouts of molten silver burned through the shroud, fortunately outside 
the image, in a symmetric fashion due to the way it was folded in the chest. The shroud was doused with 
water before further damage could occur and the burn holes were later patched. In 1578 the seat of the 
House of Savoy was moved to Turin, Italy and the shroud moved with it. In 1983 the last king of Italy, 
Umberto II, a member of the House of Savoy, willed the shroud to the Vatican. It is presently stored in a 
silver reliquary in a glass case behind the main altar of the Cathedral of John the Baptist in Turin, under the 
custody of the Archbishop of Turin." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A 
problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics 
Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, p.504)

1/08/2007
"The effect of organic contamination on the radiocarbon age of the shroud The shroud samples measured 
by the three AMS laboratories came from essentially the same place on the shroud. Although the three 
laboratories used somewhat different methods of cleaning the linen samples they received, in general, the 
cleaning involved sequential washings in HCl, NaOH and HCl with rinsing in between in distilled water. In 
some cases a solvent was also employed. If there were some organic contamination present in the samples 
that increased the content of carbon-14 compared to stable carbon and that was not removed by the 
cleaning methods employed it could produce a date that was too recent." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, 
A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments 
and Methods in Physics Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, pp.504-505. Emphasis original)

1/08/2007
"Some sources (mostly implausible) of such organic contamination have been invoked to change the 
shroud's date from the fourteenth to the first century. It should be noted, however, that the amount of 
organic contamination to produce such a major change in age is considerable. For example, if the organic 
contamination occurred as a result of the 1532 fire and if the shroud really dated to the first century, 79% of 
the carbon in the linen would have had to come from the fire and thus dated to the year 1532 and only 21% 
from the shroud itself for the combination to produce the historic date of 1357 AD. There is, however, one 
possible source of organic contamination that could change the shroud's true age to one that is younger 
and it merits further study." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A problematic 
source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research - 
Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, p.505)

1/08/2007
"Examinations of some ancient textile samples by one of us (L.A.G.-V.) with an optical microscope have 
shown that most of the thread fibers have extraneous deposits that cover their surface. These coatings may 
be composed of microorganisms (bacteria and fungi) and non-cellular heterogeneous materials. We 
speculate that the latter are mostly organic in nature and were deposited as exopolymers by the bacteria and 
fungi that invaded the textile fibers over time. The name bioplastic coatings has been given to these natural 
accretions produced by the activity of microorganisms. They are not uniform in thickness but, in general, 
seem to completely coat the fibers. Such coatings have not been previously observed nor confirmed by 
other investigators. Several threads from a putative sample of linen from the Turin Shroud were examined for 
the presence of these deposits. Many microcolonial black fungi and bacteria were found. They formed 
filamentous structures that surrounded the fibers, that is to say, the individual fibers of the cloth are 
surrounded by a bioplastic coating. If the bacteria producing this coating obtain some or all of their 
sustenance from carbon dioxide in the air they might introduce additional 14C to the cloth." (Gove, H.E., 
Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A problematic source of organic contamination of linen," 
Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, p.505)

1/08/2007
"There is additional interest in this question because there is some evidence that the linen wrappings of 
Egyptian human mummies yield radiocarbon dates that are younger than the bones of the mummies. In 
particular Manchester mummy 1770 yielded a linen wrapping date that was 340 ± 120 years younger than 
collagen from the human mummy bone. Whether this was a result of re-wrapping of the mummy, poor 
preparation of the collagen sample or bacterial contamination is being studied. Similar observations of 
bacterial deposits have been made on samples of the linen wrapping of an Egyptian mummified ibis and the 
presence of this bioplastic coating was established. This coating is not removed in the standard cleaning 
procedure that is recommended for treating cloth prior to carbon dating. The question is whether the 
presence of this coating materially affects the age of the cloth as obtained by carbon dating from what 
would be obtained if the actual cellulose of the flax from which the linen was made were dated. It is worth 
noting that, because these bacterial infestations form surficial coatings, if they affect the radiocarbon date at 
all, they are most likely to have their maximum impact on the radiocarbon measurements of the ages of cloth 
as opposed, for example, of parchment. The surface to volume ratio of cloth vastly exceeds that of other 
organic artifacts." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A problematic source of 
organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research - Section B, 1997, 
pp.504-507, p.505)

1/08/2007
"Carbon dating of ibis mummy material Samples of the wrapping cloth, bone and tissue were removed 
...from a mummified Egyptian ibis. ... These samples were hand carried to the NSF Arizona AMS Facility at 
the University of Arizona in Tucson. Collagen was extracted from the bone and tissue. The cloth was 
cleaned in two different ways following similar procedures used by Arizona to clean the linen cloth samples 
from the shroud they received in 1988. These four ibis samples (2 collagen and 2 cloth) were radiocarbon 
dated at the Arizona facility. The rational [sic] for these measurements is that the bone and probably the 
tissue collagen should not be affected by bacterial or fungal contamination and thus should yield the true 
age of the mummy and also of its cloth wrapping, assuming that the carbon content of both came from the 
carbon dioxide in the air. This assumes, in addition, that the mummy was not re-wrapped some time after the 
death of the mummified body. If the radiocarbon age of the cloth is appreciably younger than the collagen 
then (a) the mummified object was re-wrapped or (b) the bioplastic coating adds additional 14C and causes 
the radiocarbon date of the cloth to be too young or (c) the mummified object obtained its carbon from a 
source having a 14C to stable carbon ratio smaller than that of the plants from which the cloth was made. 
The latter ultimately obtain their carbon content from carbon dioxide in the air. The four measurements on 
the Arizona AMS facility yielded the following radiocarbon ages: (1) Mummy wrapping cleaned with acid-
base-acid wash and soxhlet extractions in hexane, ethanol and methanol with a final wash with distilled 
water, 2255 ± 75 years BP. (2) Mummy wrapping acetone cleaned followed by acid-base-acid and distilled 
water, 2200 ± 55 years BP. (3) Collagen extracted from ibis bone, 2680 ± 50 years BP. (4) Collagen from tissue 
attached to ibis bone, 2570 ± 80 years BP." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A 
problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics 
Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, pp.505-506. Emphasis original)

1/08/2007
"The results indicate that the cloth is some 400 to 700 years younger than the bone and tissue collagen 
assuming no corrections for mechanisms that would decrease the carbon-14 to stable carbon ratio in the 
collagen over that for the cloth are merited. In this case the presence of the bioplastic coating would appear 
to have introduced appreciable additional 14C into the cloth unless, of course, the ibis mummy in question 
was re-wrapped. There are hundreds of mummified ibises extant and the likelihood that any were re-wrapped, 
although possible, seems remote." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, "A 
problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics 
Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, pp.505-506)

1/08/2007
"Clearly more research on Egyptian mummies, both animal and human, is required. If it can be shown 
conclusively that a bacteria-produced bioplastic coating causes radiocarbon ages of cloth to be too young a 
method of separating the coating from the cellulose of the cloth must be found so the two can be 
radiocarbon dated separately. Research on ways to accomplish this is continuing. Meanwhile, although the 
results of the present measurements include the possibility that the bioplastic coating observed on the cloth 
fibers of the wrappings of the ibis cause it to yield a radiocarbon age several hundred years younger than its 
true age, they are far from definitive. It would be premature to draw any conclusions about the true age of 
the Turin Shroud from these measurements." (Gove, H.E., Mattingly, S.J., David, A.R. & L.A. Garza-Valdes, 
"A problematic source of organic contamination of linen," Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics 
Research - Section B, 1997, pp.504-507, p.507) 

2/08/2007
"Finally, in his old age Leonardo lay sick for several months, and feeling that he was near to death he 
earnestly resolved to learn about the doctrines of the Catholic faith and of the good and holy Christian 
religion. Then, lamenting bitterly, he confessed and repented, and, although he could not stand up, 
supported by his friends and servants he received the Blessed Sacrament from his bed. He was joined by 
the king, who often used to pay him affectionate visits, and having respectfully raised himself in his bed he 
told the king about his illness and what had caused it, and he protested that he had offended God and 
mankind by not working at his art as he should have done. Then he was seized by a paroxysm, the 
forerunner of death, and, to show him favour and to soothe his pain, the king held his head. Conscious of 
the great honour being done to him, the inspired Leonardo breathed his last in the arms of the king; he was 
then seventy-five years old." (Vasari, G., "The Lives of the Artists: A Selection," [1961], Volume I, Bull, G., 
transl., Penguin: Harmondsworth UK, Revised Edition, 1971, Reprinted, 1987, p.270)

3/08/2007
"What do science and scientists have to do with the Shroud of Turin, an old piece of cloth which folklore 
describes as being the very linen that wrapped the body of Jesus as it laid in the tomb over 2000 years ago? 
According to the Roman Catholic Church, which is the current owner of this cloth, the answer is `Nothing.' 
Science had its chance; now it is time for scientists to leave the cloth alone. Why has the church placed a 
moratorium on scientific study of this cloth? Could it be that the church is afraid that modern technology 
will prove the Shroud a fake, and hence, seriously harm the faith of millions of Shroud believers? That is 
unlikely. Instead, the church has come to the very same conclusion about scientists that this book is 
attempting to illustrate - the prejudices of a scientist determine how that scientist interprets the scientific 
facts, more so than any overwhelming scientific evidence that points to one theory being more valid than 
another. Authorities in the church realize that science and scientists who have based their faith in 
Naturalism will never admit to the possibility that the Shroud could have wrapped the body of Christ. To 
admit to this possibility is to also support the conclusion that this cloth was touched by a God who became 
a real human being for a very short period of time in earth's history. That would be a supernatural 
explanation, and supernatural explanations are ruled out a priori by those scientists who believe that all of 
nature must be explained in purely materialistic terms." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of 
Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to 
Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"The story of the Shroud is interesting on its own, and it can be read about in a large number of well-
documented books. I discuss the Shroud here only because it provides a unique opportunity to observe the 
extent to which some scientists will ignore irrefutable scientific evidence to ensure, in their own minds, that 
scripture is not historically accurate, and that all physical phenomena can be explained by natural, not 
supernatural, causes. In this way, the prejudices that affect the scientific study of the Shroud are similar in 
nature to those observed in the scientific study of origins. But unlike origins, the Shroud can be measured 
and tested, and tests repeated over and over again. Compared to origins, the debate surrounding the Shroud 
is far more focused. The authenticity of the Shroud does not deal with a vast theory with admitted gaps, but 
with a specific object which can be examined directly by the state-of-the-art scientific equipment. Following 
a thorough experimental investigation, modern science ought to be able to pronounce some sort of verdict 
on the Shroud." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the 
Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway 
Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"The reader needs to be mindful of the fact that whether or not the Shroud is authentic is not important to 
the following description; the question of its authenticity will not be dealt with here. Instead, the following 
chapter will concentrate on describing difficulties scientists have been having with two particular questions 
regarding the Shroud. These questions pertain to i) how the image on the Shroud was formed, and ii) how 
old the linen cloth is. As described here, the answers given by scientists to these two questions depend 
more on the prejudices of the scientists than they do on the scientific data itself. A deeply-held faith in 
Naturalism fosters prejudices that severely bias the interpretation of the available scientific data. As noted 
previously, the opinions of experts in a particular field are necessary for the lay person to form his own 
opinion. However, in evaluating the opinion of experts, the lay person also needs to be aware of the 
prejudices of these experts. It would be unwise to rely on expert opinions if all these experts worked from the 
same set of prejudices." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming 
Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and 
Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"The Shroud of Turin is a linen cloth stored in a cathedral in Turin, the major city in the Piedmont region of 
northwest Italy. It is in the shape of a large table cloth, approximately 14 ft long and 3.5 ft wide, and down 
the middle of the cloth, there is a faint, straw-coloured image of the front and the back of a naked man. Since 
this cloth exists today, it can be, and has been, subjected to numerous scientific investigations. But after 
decades of study, science has yet to determine how this image got on the cloth. Tradition states that the 
faint image represents Christ as his lifeless body laid in the tomb following his crucifixion, but alas, there is 
also no scientific means to test if the image is Christ. On the other hand, science has been able to determine 
firstly that this image is not the product of an artist, and secondly, that this image is, so far as modern 
science can tell, a flawless representation of a man who was crucified and buried as Christ was." (Chiang, 
R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation 
Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton 
ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Historical documents on the Shroud start in 1357 AD, and because this places the Shroud in the Middle 
Ages during the golden age of religious relics, many skeptics believe that the image on the Shroud was 
painted in order to be used as a relic to obtain funds for a struggling church. Other experts believe the 
Shroud to be authentic, and Wilson has provided a reasonable scenario which places the Shroud first into 
the hands of Jesus' disciples, then found in Turkey where it was used to impart healing, and eventually 
ending up with the Crusaders prior to the collapse of Constantinople at the hands of the Turks. According 
to Wilson, the Shroud was cared for by the Knights Templars for several centuries. The Knights Templars 
was a secret sect composed of knights who were crusaders or the descendants of these crusaders. The 
appearance of the cloth in Medieval Europe corresponds roughly to the time the Templars were undergoing 
severe persecution for political reasons, possibly explaining why it appeared at this point in history." 
(Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution 
Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: 
Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"After the reformation, Protestant Christians not only distanced themselves from the politics and theology 
of the Roman Catholic Church, they also disregarded all relics and religious icons which had become objects 
of worship. This tradition has extended into the present, and many Protestants in North America, if they are 
familiar with the Shroud, consider it a religious relic not worthy of any serious thought. However, the 
importance of a burial cloth should not be underestimated since such a burial cloth is mentioned several 
times in the gospels. For any Christian who believes the Gospels are historically accurate, it would be safe to 
conclude that not only did a burial cloth exist, it must have had some importance; each of the gospels 
describes the body of Jesus being wrapped in this linen. It is the assumption of many today that the Shroud 
of Turin is the actual burial cloth or linen that wrapped the body of Christ. Whether the Shroud could be, in 
fact, that very linen is the question that science has been trying to answer." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets 
Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an 
integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Many scientists have been drawn into the study of the Shroud because of the mystery that surrounds it. If 
it is a medieval forgery, then modern science should be able to expose this fake without too much difficulty. 
The first intensive scientific study of the Shroud was conducted in 1978 by a group of about 40 scientists 
collectively referred to as the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). These scientists transported more 
than two million dollars worth of the state-of-the-art technology to Turin, and were able to examine the 
Shroud over a period of several days. Since this cloth was being brought out from storage for only a short 
period of time, the scientists worked in shifts and used every minute of every day to collect data. When 
STURP finally reached its conclusion, it could find nothing to discredit the claim that the Shroud was the 
burial cloth of Christ. In fact, several pieces of new information were uncovered to further support this claim. 
As the official statement from STURP reads: `We can conclude for now that the Shroud image is that of a 
real human form of a scourged, crucified man. It is not the product of an artist. The blood stains are 
composed of hemoglobin and also give a positive test for serum albumin. The image is an ongoing study 
and until further chemical studies are made...the problem remains unsolved.'" (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets 
Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an 
integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Then ten years later, in 1988, radiocarbon dating of the cloth was done by three independent research 
laboratories. In the February 1989 issue of Nature (one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the 
world), it was announced by these scientists that the cloth was a fraud. The cloth was far too young to have 
existed at the time of Christ. Of all the data ever collected on the Shroud, scientists finally found one piece of 
evidence that questioned the possibility that the Shroud wrapped the body of Christ. With this evidence, 
they concluded `conclusively' that the image must have been created during the Middle Ages by some 
natural or man-made process. They failed to mention that their `conclusive' conclusion was based only on 
circumstantial evidence. It is the weight that is given to this single piece of evidence from radiocarbon 
dating which clearly demonstrates how scientists, wanting to reach a predetermined conclusion, will let their 
own prejudices dictate how they interpret the data. To declare conclusively that this article is a fake based 
only on radiocarbon dating, you need to manipulate the scientific facts, accepting some and ignoring others. 
And declaring the Shroud a fake raises some very difficult questions that cannot be answered by the state-
of-the-art technology. Because of the significance placed on one piece of evidence, the only evidence that 
questions the Shroud's authenticity, other questions regarding how and why it was made are simply tossed 
aside." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the 
Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway 
Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Following the 1988 radiocarbon dating, the interest in the Shroud greatly diminished, reflecting the fact that 
many scientists were studying the Shroud only to discredit it, not to document and to more fully understand 
its physical qualities. Many of these scientists chose to pursue other areas of study after the radiocarbon 
dating. This action may have been premature. Since 1988, radiocarbon dating of other relics from the past 
has proven to be totally unreliable under certain circumstances, and such circumstances can be applied to 
the Shroud. In light of the new concerns regarding the accuracy of radiocarbon dating, there is now a 
renewed interest in the Shroud. It would seem that despite the prejudice to accept only naturalistic 
explanations, which caused the scientific community to label the Shroud a fake in the first place, the image 
still glares out at us causing us to ponder what is it and how it got there." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets 
Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an 
integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Knowing what the image on the Shroud looks like does not tell us what the image is made of. In 1389, a 
number of years after its first showing in Medieval Europe, Pierre d'Arcis, Bishop for the Roman Catholic 
Church in Troyes, claimed the Shroud to be a forgery painted by a clever painter. On the other hand, the 
image is so unlike any painting this accusation did not stop others from believing in its authenticity. If it 
were a painting, then evidence of it being painted should have been readily apparent. This was not the case, 
so whether the image was a painting or not remained unanswered for several centuries." (Chiang, R.G., 
"Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: 
Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, 
Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Then in 1898, an amateur photographer, Secondo Pia, made a discovery that catapulted the Shroud from 
the world of mysticism and superstition associated with of the Middle Ages into the more objective world of 
modern science. ... When Pia developed his negative, he expected to see an image on the negative that was 
somewhat incomprehensible -- more ghost-like in appearance than real life. The light areas observed by the 
eye would appear as dark, and the dark as light. In addition, since the actual image on the Shroud was 
ghostly to begin with, then its image on the negative should be even less comprehensible. However, what 
Pia saw in his developing pan, and the sensation he felt when he first observed it, was so overwhelming that 
it would stay with him for the rest of his life. ... The negative image of the Shroud appeared as a well-defined 
picture of a man which, for all intents and purposes, was the actual positive print ... . No longer was there 
confusion between light and dark areas. Instead, Pia observed a picture that was so lifelike that it could not 
have been a painting, but a photograph. The image on the Shroud was actually a negative which means that 
the cloth functioned just like the film in a camera capturing an image when it was exposed to some form of 
energy. To have been painted by a Medieval painter, the painter would have had knowledge of 
photography about 500 years before the first camera was made, and would have had the ability to paint a 
negative image without having the means by which to see what that image would look like after it was 
photographed. For Pia, and many others, this was evidence enough that the image was not a painting. 
Somehow the image was imprinted on the Shroud, possibly by some type of physical force associated with 
the resurrection, a supernatural event. It was not made by human hands." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets 
Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an 
integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"This first photograph of the Shroud marks the beginning of its modern scientific study. Heller has 
estimated that since Pia's time, and prior to the radiocarbon dating studies, between 100,000 and 150,000 
scientific man-hours have been spent on the Shroud with the best analytical tools available. Yet despite 
being the most studied object on earth, the evidence cannot tell us if the Shroud is a fake, nor can it tell us 
how the image was imprinted on the Shroud. Essentially, we are left with accepting one of two hypotheses 
as guided by our own personal prejudices: The Shroud is a fake, produced in the 1300's, either as a joke, or 
to help raise funds for a struggling church; or the Shroud is the actual photographic imprint of a man 
crucified as Christ was." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming 
Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and 
Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"The debate in the scientific world does not center around the image being Christ for there are no scientific 
tests to determine if it is Christ. If the man on the cloth looked like Jesus, this would serve as proof that it is 
Jesus, but we have no pictures of him. Instead, the debate in the scientific world questions whether this 
image can be Christ, a hypothesis that can be rejected in one of two ways. First, if this image can be 
explained as a piece of artwork painted by human hands, then it was not created by a supernatural event 
associated with the resurrection. Second, if the cloth on which this image has been placed is not at least 
2000 years old, then the cloth is too young to have been around at the time of Christ. The opinion that the 
image was a painting has been, as noted previously, expressed ever since the Shroud first appeared in 
recorded history. The opinion that it is too young to have wrapped the body of Christ has been around 
since the radiocarbon dating experiments. How do these opinions hold up in the face of all the other 
scientific data?" (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the 
Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway 
Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Some scientists insist that the image on the Shroud is a painting, and accuse those who think otherwise as 
being misled by their own presuppositions. One such skeptic is Walter McCrone, president emeritus and 
founder of McCrone Research Institute. ... After receiving and keeping 32 sticky tape samples taken from the 
Shroud, he resigned from STURP stating the causes to be `strong divergences of opinion.' These strong 
disagreements were clearly evident in McCrone's interpretation of the results. His conclusions ran totally 
opposite to the official statement of the STURP team, and in his writings, McCrone was very critical of all 
the other scientists of that team. ... From the minute samples given to McCrone to study, he published two 
papers identifying the Shroud to be a painting painted about 1355 AD. He came to this conclusion because 
he discovered iron oxide in the fibers from the Shroud. Iron oxide is commonly used as a paint pigment, and 
for this reason, he concluded that the Shroud was a painting. As noted above, this opinion goes against the 
opinion of all the other scientists who studied the Shroud back in 1978." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets 
Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an 
integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

3/08/2007
"Despite McCrone's insistence that the `Shroud' is a beautiful painting created to help a struggling church, 
this conclusion overlooks a number of questions regarding the ability of artists in Medieval Europe. The 
actual image on the Shroud was made by burn marks at the surface of the uppermost fibers making up the 
cloth. These burn marks could have been created by applying, very delicately, an acidic solution with a very 
fine brush so that only the uppermost surface of individual strands of the cloth would be coated. The burn 
does not extend into the fibers below the surface. Assuming a Medieval painter did create this image by a 
technology yet to be developed by modern science, then this `gifted' artist was also able to complete a 
number of impossible tasks, some of which were: 1) He painted the bloodstains before painting the image. 
At the microscopic level, the burn marks that create the image cover the blood stains. 2) He used genuine 
human blood having excessive amounts of bilirubin. Modern forensics has demonstrated that severe 
scourging will cause the red blood cells to rupture releasing large amounts of bilirubin. The artist not only 
knew this information, he also painted the Shroud knowing that one day the technology would be 
developed to reveal this information. 3) The artist painted Jesus as a nude. Medieval paintings never depict 
a nude Christ, and even today, the image of a totally naked Christ would be very hard, if possible at all, to 
come by. On the other hand, a nude Christ conforms to genuine Roman crucifixions. 4) The artist placed the 
nail marks on the wrists, not in the hands. This placement goes against medieval convention, but represents 
the actual place where the nails must be inserted in order for the body to hang on the cross without ripping 
away. 5) He painted an anatomically and photographically perfect human image in a photographic negative 
centuries before the science of photography was developed. Moreover, since this "painting" agrees with all 
findings from modern biochemistry, medicine, forensic pathology and anatomy, botany, photography and 3-
D computer analysis, the artist had to know enough of the effects of crucifixion on the body to avoid 
detection by all the efforts of modern science. It might actually be easier to believe that the artist was 
capable of time travel, thus gaining information about the future, than to believe that such a person living in 
medieval times. In addition to all these reasons to disregard the belief that the image was painted by a 
medieval painter, the image is such that it tells us the linen was draped, not wrapped, around the body. In 
the middle ages, the only type of wrapping depicted in pictures was the mummy style. It was unknown 
during medieval Europe that Jews at the time of Christ did not coil the cloth around the bodies. It was not 
until the 20th century that archeologists discovered this form of wrapping. Did the artist know that 
eventually people would discover this? If so, the artist himself must have been divine. If the Shroud of Turin 
is a forgery of the 14th century, as McCrone claims, and not a genuine artifact of the 1st century, the 
purported medieval forger must have been able to do all the impossible tasks noted above." (Chiang, R.G., 
"Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: 
Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, 
Canada, 2004) 

4/08/2007
"Few skeptics of the Shroud actually accept McCrone's evidence anymore, although at one time, this 
evidence was widely used to discredit a supernatural origin of the Shroud. Instead, many skeptics now 
accept the fact first documented by Secondo Pia - the image on the Shroud is a photographic negative, not a 
painting. And if the Shroud is considered to be a photographic negative, the next challenge is to devise a 
theory that explains in naturalistic terms how a photographic negative of a crucified man could have been 
imprinted on a piece of linen during the Middle Ages. One of the more intriguing and imaginative theories to 
explain the photographic negative on the Shroud was described in a book by Picknett and Prince. [Picknett, 
L. & Prince, C., "Turin Shroud: In Whose Image?," Harper Collins Publishers: New York, 1994] These 
authors accept the fact that the image on the Shroud is a photographic negative. If it is a photographic 
negative, then who in medieval Europe would have had the scientific knowledge, ingenuity, and the desire 
to produce this Shroud as a hoax? The answer to their question: Leonardo da Vinci. Assuming that da Vinci 
was dissatisfied with the church in one way or another, he produced the Shroud to play an elaborate joke on 
the church. According to Picknett and Prince, da Vinci constructed a light-tight room with a small hole in 
one of the walls of this room. He then obtained the body of a recently crucified man to ensure that the image 
of this body would be truly representative of the crucified Christ. His next step was to hang this body in the 
sunlight directly outside of the light-tight room in front of the hole in one wall. Constructed in this fashion, 
this room served as a very large pinhole camera in which the image of the crucified man was projected into 
the room through the hole. This image was captured on a cloth soaked in a chemical that burned the cloth 
when the cloth was exposed to light. The exposure time would have been relatively long since the material 
on the cloth was not very sensitive to light. Therefore, to ensure a sharply focused image, the body needed 
to be turned continuously to account for the movement of the sun. Once one side of the cloth was done 
(e.g. the front of the body), the cloth was flipped over, and the body turned to obtain the other side of the 
image. The authors provide some scientific evidence of their own to show that such a picture can be 
produced with this technology, but compared to the image on the Shroud, their examples are far from the 
quality that was produced hundreds of years earlier. To add credence to their theory, they also compared a 
self-portrait of da Vinci with the face on the Shroud, and they see a remarkable similarity. They conclude 
that, for the ultimate joke on the church, da Vinci removed the head of the crucified man and placed an image 
of his own face there." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice 
in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," 
Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"This theory has received little attention from those who believe in the Shroud's authenticity since it is 
absurd to the highest degree. Conversely, it has been seriously considered by Shroud skeptics who simply 
cannot accept a supernatural origin for the image on the Shroud. In light of a lack of any other theory, this 
theory has gained credibility among the skeptics. Unfortunately for the Shroud skeptics, there are many 
difficulties with the Picknett and Prince interpretation, one of which being the birthday of da Vinci. Da Vinci 
was born in 1492 [1452 -SEJ]; the Shroud appeared in recorded history in 1357. For their theory to be correct, 
not only did da Vinci understand photography centuries before it was discovered, he also had to replace the 
original Shroud with a replica that he created, and this switch had to occur without being detected by those 
who were intimately acquainted with this relic. First of all, one wonders what motive would have driven da 
Vinci to undertake such a deception, and second, why a scientist as gifted as da Vinci would not have 
developed photography to its full potential. It is simply unimaginable that anyone like da Vinci would have 
remained silent about an [sic] work of art he created that even today scientists are unable to duplicate." 
(Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution 
Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: 
Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Nevertheless, as it is with the theory of evolution, this naturalistic theory of the Shroud has been given 
serious consideration because it does not require the existence of a supernatural force. By having a totally 
naturalistic explanation, it is no longer necessary for skeptics to worry that a supernatural force could have 
created the image on the Shroud. Although the Picknett and Prince theory is very, very weak, it does 
represent a significant change in the attitude of the skeptics. No longer do these skeptics insist that the 
image on the Shroud is a painting. This turnabout may have been encouraged by the fact that the 
radiocarbon dating showed `conclusively' that the Shroud was too young to have been around to wrap the 
body of Christ. Possibly, with the assurance of the radiocarbon dating, the opponents of the Shroud have 
been more willing to concede that the facts are indeed overwhelmingly in favour of the image not being a 
painting. Unfortunately for the skeptics, who had their day when the radiocarbon results were first reported, 
radiocarbon dating is not thought to be as conclusive as it once was. It is quite possible that antique relics, 
like the Shroud, which have been exposed to everything from extreme heat and smoke to the touch of human 
hands, have too many variables associated with them to accurately determine their age using radiocarbon 
dating." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the 
Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway 
Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Radiocarbon dating works on the same principle as an hour glass with the radioactive isotope of carbon 
(carbon 14) serving as the sands of time in the upper compartment. Living organisms incorporate radioactive 
carbon into their bodies until a steady-state is reached so that any living organism has a fixed amount of 
carbon 14 in it, an amount which is correlated with the amount of carbon 14 in today's atmosphere. 
Assuming that the amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere has not changed over the eons, the amount of 
carbon 14 in any living organism at the time of its death can be estimated. Upon death, no more carbon 14 is 
being incorporated into the animal, and the carbon 14 in the object begins to diminish like the sand in the 
upper chamber of an hour glass. Unlike the hour glass, where sand is collected in the lower chamber, the 
carbon 14 decays into another element, nitrogen, which is lost from the object. In an hour glass, it takes 30 
minutes for half the sand to move from the top to the bottom of the container. For a dead organism, it takes 
approximately 5700 years for half its complement of carbon 14 at the time of death to disappear. To estimate 
the age of a once-living object, radiocarbon dating laboratories use very sophisticated machines to measure 
extremely small amounts of carbon 14 in these objects. The amount that is found in the object now is 
compared to the amount that was suppose to be in the object at the time of its death, and assuming i) that 
there was a steady loss of carbon 14 and ii) that no new carbon 14 was added since the object died, then the 
time when the object died can be calculated." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in 
"Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science 
and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Although the radiocarbon laboratories will give you an estimate of the age of a once-living specimen, the 
only empirical fact they provide is the amount of carbon 14 present in the sample. The assumptions that an 
organism contained a certain amount of carbon 14 at death, and that no other sources of carbon 14 were 
added to it after its death, are used alongside the rate of decay of carbon 14 to provide an estimate of the 
age of the material. Since carbon 14 disappears at a constant rate after death, then the more carbon 14 found 
in the sample, the younger the sample must be; the less carbon 14 found in the sample, the older the sample 
must be. If no carbon 14 is found in the sample, then the sample is considered to be millions of years old." 
(Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution 
Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: 
Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Since the Shroud is made of materials that were once living plants, radiocarbon dating can be applied to the 
Shroud. Before 1988, the Shroud had already undergone several forensic tests made by many experts in the 
field, and each finding supported the belief that this cloth was approximately 2000 yrs old, and that it 
originated from Israel. For example, the weaving is distinctive to the time of Christ and microscopic pollen 
grains found embedded in the cloth are from plants endemic to regions around the Dead Sea. Supposedly, 
radiocarbon dating would be able to tell us whether or not the cloth were old enough to have been around at 
the time of Christ. If it were significantly younger than expected, this would support the theory that it was 
not the death shroud of Christ. And if, by chance, this cloth were as young as the Middle Ages, this would 
confirm the theory that the image was produced by someone using a natural process to help support a 
fledgling church. In the winter of 1989, Damon et al. announced to the world the results of the radiocarbon 
dating. Their article in Nature stated, `The results provide conclusive evidence that the linen of the 
Shroud of Turin is Medieval.' [Damon, P.E., et al., "Radiocarbon dating of the Shroud of Turin," Nature, 
Vol. 337, 1989, pp.611-615] It is interesting that a reputable science journal like Nature would permit any 
author to claim that his results were conclusive unless one takes into account the deep-seated prejudice that 
the scientific community has against any theory that is not purely naturalistic. To claim conclusively that 
the Shroud is Medieval demonstrates this prejudice and deflects attention from the difficult questions 
regarding the Shroud's origin. The evidence they presented was not conclusive; it was, at best, supportive. 
The only definitive conclusion that can be made from this data is that the Shroud has enough carbon 14 in it 
to suggest that it is relatively young - provided that the assumption concerning the amount of carbon 14 in 
it to begin with is true, and that carbon 14 was not added after the cloth was made. To conclude that the 
Shroud is Medieval is an extrapolation of the facts, and should, in proper science, never be portrayed as 
`conclusive.' Conclusive proof should be reserved for data that are independent variables free of unprovable 
assumptions. The amount of carbon 14 in the cloth, and the rate of decay of carbon 14, are testable variables 
that can be measured over and over again, but the amount of carbon 14 present in the cloth when it was 
originally made, and the exclusion of extraneous sources of carbon 14 after death, are assumptions that must 
be accepted by faith." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice 
in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," 
Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Although the popular press never reported any rebuttal of the conclusions of the Nature paper, the 
journal itself did entertain at least one suggestion in the same issue. Phillips argued that the interpretation of 
the radiocarbon dating may have been flawed since an extra source of carbon 14 could have appeared on the 
cloth as a result of a singular event that occurred at the resurrection. [Phillips, T.J., "Shroud irradiated with 
neutrons?," Nature Vol. 337, 1989, p.594] This argument, of course, assumes that the cloth is authentic, 
and goes one step further by believing in a resurrection event which produced a burst of energy to form the 
photographic image on the cloth. But if such an event occurred, Phillips argued that it could have been 
associated with the production of extra neutrons which would have bombarded all the atoms in the cloth, 
not just the carbon. These extra neutrons would have created new carbon 14 making the cloth appear much 
younger than it really is. In order to test this hypothesis, Phillips proposed that the cloth should be 
measured for the presence of other radioactive isotopes. If an unusual abundance of other radioactive 
isotopes were discovered, then the cloth could easily be 2000 years old while appearing only 500 to 700 
years old according to radioactive carbon technique. In his reply to this rebuttal, Hedges, the eleventh 
author on the 21-authored radiocarbon paper in Nature, stated that such an alteration in the carbon in the 
cloth may have occurred, and could be measured. Unfortunately, he declined to consider such 
experimentation because, `If a supernatural explanation is to be proposed, it seems pointless to make any 
scientific measurement of the shroud at all.' [Hedges, R.E.M., "Hedges replies," . Nature Vol. 337, 1989, 
p.594] In essence, Hedges agreed with Phillip's suggestion that a resurrection event could have increased 
the amount of radioactive isotopes on the cloth, but argued against carrying out the definitive experiments 
because of his preconceived belief that the resurrection event could not, and did not, occur. Since the 
neutron flux proposed by Phillips would have been produced by a supernatural event, Hedges felt no need 
to test this hypothesis since divine forces do not exist." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of 
Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to 
Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Since the publication of the initial radiocarbon testing, there have been a number of theories proposed to 
explain why an object which should be 2000 years old could have enough carbon 14 in it to appear only 600 
to 700 years old. These theories have become of greater interest, not because of the Shroud, but because of 
the radiocarbon dating of other archaeological relics. Apparently some relics taken from sites known to be 
thousands of years old have had enough carbon 14 on them to be dated only hundreds of years old. Of all 
the theories used to explain the excess carbon 14 in ancient relics, I find that the most compelling one 
suggests that living microorganisms, such as bacteria, were present on these relics during their history. As 
these microorganisms grew and multiplied, they would have incorporated new carbon 14 into themselves, 
and into their organic wastes. This process would have resulted in the formation, on the specimen, of a 
bioplastic coating made up of a transparent layer of microbiological contaminants long after the specimen 
had died. In this way, bacteria on the Shroud could have added the excess carbon 14 that caused the Shroud 
to appear younger than what it truly is. That the Shroud could have had bacteria on it is unquestionable 
since it has always been touched or stroked or held by human hands, and considering its passage through 
time, it is unlikely that many of these hands were aseptic. Furthermore, the Shroud has never been known to 
have been washed. Given these conditions, it would seem highly unlikely that bacteria were not alive and 
well on this relic. To confirm the theory of the presence of extraneous living material on the cloth, the 
Shroud would need to be examined for the presence of this bioplastic coating." (Chiang, R.G., "Science 
meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing 
an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Unfortunately, the debate over the age of the Shroud has caused some serious concerns regarding the 
manner by which the Shroud should be revered. At present all the existing strands of the cloth were ordered 
returned, and there are no plans to allow the Shroud to undergo any further scientific testing. Possibly the 
Roman Catholic Church has grown tired of the exploitation of this relic by the scientific community and is 
saying to scientists that you can only accept the authenticity of the Shroud by faith, for if it is authentic, 
science will not be able to confirm it to be the image of Christ. Unless it is proven a hoax, science will never 
reach a satisfactory conclusion based on the facts. As argued by one philosopher of science, maybe 
`science cannot cope with the Shroud of Turin.' [Trenn, T.J., "Why science cannot cope with the Shroud of 
Turin," Lecture March 6, 1992, Pascal Centre, Redeemer University College, Ancaster, Canada]" (Chiang, 
R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation 
Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton 
ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"After the radiocarbon dating, work on the Shroud diminished. Many scientists could not accept the fact 
that it was worth studying if it were a forgery. Indeed, most scientists started studying the Shroud in the 
first place to try to prove that it is was a forgery. Since the radiocarbon dating provided this proof, the 
impetus to study it was removed. Herein lies an example of how prejudice has directed attention away from a 
very interesting scientific question, for abandoning the Shroud because it was shown to be a forgery does 
not explain how the image was created in the first place. Should the method by which the negative image 
was placed so carefully on the very surface of the fibers of the cloth be discovered, then a quantum leap in 
our understanding of the natural world may occur. But due to prejudice, this opportunity is overlooked." 
(Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution 
Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: 
Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"The prejudices associated with the scientific study of the Shroud illustrate that prejudices cannot be put 
aside in the interpretation of scientific data. Despite the overwhelming evidence that the cloth displays the 
photographic image of someone who was crucified in the manner that is described for Jesus, some people 
have given the questionable evidence that the Shroud is not 2000 years old infinitely more weight. In the 
apparent name of science, the Shroud is declared a hoax. One biology textbook describes the controversy as 
follows: To be authentic, the Shroud needs to be at least 2000 years old; and if the Shroud is not at least 
2000 years old, then it must be a painting which `was painted as a religious art object or as a fraud.' 
[Audesirk, G. & Audesirk, T., "Biology: Life on Earth," Maxwell Macmillan: Toronto, Canada, Third Edition, 
1993, p.339]. The text ignores the most important question of all. If it were a painting, by what unknown 
technology did the artist create this masterpiece?." (Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of 
Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to 
Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"Although we do not know at present what created the image on the Shroud, deeming it unworthy of study 
simply because it may not, or cannot, be the image of Christ borders on the line of scientific arrogance. Our 
prejudices should never cause us to stop questioning and probing for the truth. After all, is that not what 
science is for? We must be able to overcome our prejudices, or at least recognize what they are, so that we 
are able to respond intelligently to events that are totally contrary to what we might be expecting to see." 
(Chiang, R.G., "Science meets Religion: Shroud of Turin," in "Overcoming Prejudice in the Evolution 
Creation Debate: Developing an integrative approach to Science and Christianity," Doorway Publications: 
Hamilton ON, Canada, 2004)

4/08/2007
"The history and scientific background of the study of the Shroud of Turin are presented. We re-examined 
pollen grains collected by Dr. M. Frei from the Shroud of Turin in 1973 and 1978 and from the Sudarium of 
Oviedo in 1979. Investigations of plant images observed on several sets of photographs as well as directly 
from the Shroud itself reveal additional plant species. This interesting assemblage of plants correlates by 
both geographic distribution and phenology a Middle Eastern origin for the Shroud, possibly in the 
Jerusalem area. This noteworthy juxtaposition of pollen grains and plant images on the Shroud apparently 
occurred during the vernal season in the months of March and April. Our botanical evidence, together with 
additional physical data, suggests that the Shroud of Turin existed before the 8th century and that it 
originated from the vicinity of Jerusalem." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of 
the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press, St. Louis MO, 1999, p.1)

4/08/2007
"While examining the city records of Edessa (now Urfa, Turkey), the early Church historian Eusebius (263-
339 AD) found evidence that an object, presumably a cloth with an image, was taken to King Abgar V by 
Thaddeus, one of Jesus' disciples, in the year 30 AD and that the king was concomitantly healed from an 
ailment, possibly leprosy (Eusebius, 1965 [translation]). The giving of the cloth to King Abgar is depicted in 
a 10th century icon kept in St. Catherine's Monastery, in southern Sinai, Egypt. Wilson (1979) was first to 
observe that this cloth, known as the Mandylion, may represent the actual burial shroud of Jesus. This cloth 
was folded into eight thicknesses and placed in a cloth envelope with a circular opening revealing only the 
facial image. This envelope containing the blood-stained linen cloth was suspended in a frame, with a 
decorative trellis covering all but the facial view." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., 
"Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.3-4)

4/08/2007
"The face on the cloth presented to King Abgar rapidly became very well known and highly regarded along 
the main trade routes from the Mediterranean to the Far East. Edessa was one of the major cities on these 
well-traveled routes (Segal, 1970). Abgar had a tile copy of the facial image mounted above the city gate. 
The story of Abgar's healing by the presence of this image spread rapidly, and similar facial attributes were 
incorporated into regional deities (Whanger & Whanger, 1998). Dated statues of various gods have been 
found along the trade routes with heads rather accurately based on the facial image located in Edessa. One 
of these statues dates by inscription to 31 AD, another to 54 AD. This Mandylion face is also the basis for 
many of the portraits of Jesus found in the catacombs of Rome from the 3rd and 4th centuries, perhaps 
dating to even the 2nd century (Whanger & Whanger, 1998)" (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & 
Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.4)

4/08/2007
"The accuracy of the carbon-14 dating tests, which determined the origin of the linen of the Shroud to be 
between 1260 AD and 1390 AD (Damon et al., 1989), must be addressed. There were major changes in the 
original testing protocol before any sample was initially collected, which allowed operational flaws yielding 
results of questionable validity for the Shroud as a whole. We are not challenging the precision of the 
carbon-14 test results of the single peripheral sample removed at that time. However, the premise underlying 
the carbon dating presupposes that no additional carbon-14 has been added to the specimen at any point in 
time, and that the one sample is representative of the entire linen material. It should be noted that the 
recommended number of seven carbon testing laboratories was reduced to only three (Dinegar & Schwalbe, 
1989). Further, the original plan was to take seven different samples from seven different locations of the 
cloth. In actuality only one linen sample was removed, and that sample was divided among only three 
testing laboratories (Gove, 1996)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the 
Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.5)

4/08/2007
"Also noteworthy was that the physical linen sample itself was removed from one of the most soiled places 
on the Shroud, which also is near a burn scorch and a water stain. Standardized, pretest cleaning methods 
for radiocarbon dating for cloth with such massive and historic contamination as the Shroud have not been 
adequately tested (Petrosillo & Marinelli, 1996). In addition, this solitary sample was removed from an area 
that had been damaged and possibly reinforced or repaired. The linen sample, which initially measured 8.1 x 
1.6 cm, included a hand-stitched seam of uncertain age, but possibly even 17th century origin, which runs 
along one side of the Shroud. This seam was separated from the sample before the testing. However, an x-
ray of the fabric (see from the x-ray photos of STURP = Shroud of Turin Research Project, 1978) region 
where the sample was taken reveals apparent additional novel threads extending out about 4 cm from the 
seam into the fabric. Frame-by-frame analysis of the videotape of the actual Shroud sample removal evinces 
the pulling of these extra threads (Adler et al., 1997; Whanger & Whanger, 1998)." (Danin, A., Whanger, 
A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis 
MO, 1999, p.5)

4/08/2007
"Many of the pretest examinations of the fabric recommended in the original protocol were not conducted. 
These would have ascertained any masking contaminants that would perhaps skew the carbon-14 results. 
Later chemical analysis of several fibers from the solitary sample removed for carbon dating revealed that 
the chemical composition of that sample is markedly different from that of fibers from many other areas of 
the Shroud (Adler, 1996)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of 
Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.5)

4/08/2007
"Living fungi and bacteria have been discovered growing inside the fibers of the Shroud, representing 
potential carbon contaminants for the carbon-14 studies[Gove, H., et al., 1997, "A problematic source of 
organic contaminants of linen," in Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research-Section B, Vol. 
123, No. 1, March 1997, pp.504-507]. To what extent the carbon-14 content of the cloth was altered by the 
intense heat of a 1532 fire, which caused the burn marks and the water stains on the Shroud, is not known. 
Research has shown that significant increase in carbon 14 may take place under the unusual circumstances 
that might have been present during the fire [Jackson, J.P. & Propp, K., 1998, "On the evidence that the 
radiocarbon date of the Shroud was significantly affected by the 1532 fire," in Actes du Symposium 
Scientifique International du CIELT, Nouvelle Imprimerie Laballery: Clamecy, France, pp.61-82 ]." (Danin, 
A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.6)

4/08/2007
"The exact mechanisms by which the images on the Shroud were formed are not known, but they are 
speculated to be some type or types of radiation. The process may even have possibly included a neutron 
flux, which could have produced additional carbon 14 in the molecular structure of the flax fibers themselves, 
thus yielding an erroneously young age (Trenn, 1996)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, 
M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.6)

4/08/2007
"In addition to the questions regarding the carbon-14 dating (Damon et al., 1989), artistic documentation 
exists for the bimillenial history suggested for the Shroud. In 1979 we (A. & M. Whanger) were challenged 
to find a way to determine whether the Pantocrator icon at St. Catherine's Monastery, in southern Sinai, was 
indeed painted from the Shroud of Turin as claimed by one of the monks there." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., 
Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 
1999, p.6)

4/08/2007
"Alan and Mary Whanger developed a method of comparing images referred to as the Polarized Image 
Overlay Technique (PIOT) (Whanger & Whanger, 1985). This PIOT methodology involves the use of two 
projectors, each with a polarizing filter (one with its polarizing axis vertically oriented and the second 
horizontally so) placed in front of the lenses. Images to be compared are then projected through these filters 
onto a lenticular screen, where they are superimposed and aligned with respect to one another. They are 
next viewed through a third polarizing filter that is gradually rotated through a 90° arc so that one image 
fades into the other in a controlled manner. This process enables precise, diagrammable comparisons that 
can be repeated. Each feature or mark that is the same or very nearly the same is called a point of 
congruence (PC). These PC features correspond not only to large structures, but also permit resolution of 
small details such as the tip of the nose or the shape of a blood stain in the hair. While not strictly 
analogous, we use forensic criteria for determining same source, i.e., 45 to 60 points of congruence (PC) for 
comparison of complicated images such as faces, and 14 PC for simple images such as fingerprints. The 
PIOT methodology (Whanger & Whanger, 1985, 1998) allows comparison of various objects and images 
with the Shroud images or stains. This affords for confirmation, image by image, stain by stain, 
painstakingly, of the historical authenticity of the Shroud. Representative observations include: (1) Two 
different lepton coins issued by Pontius Pilate are observed, one lain over each eye of the Man of the 
Shroud, both dated 29 AD, with one coin 211 PC. (2) Dated statuary (31 AD and 54 AD) along trade routes 
(Edessa influence), with 79 and 67 PC respectively. (3) Pantocrator icon, St. Catherine's Monastery, dated to 
550 AD, about 250 PC. (4) Gold solidus coin of Byzantine Emperor Justinian II (Constantinople), struck 692 
AD, at a resolution of 140 PC. (5) Sudarium (face cloth) of Oviedo, dated to the 1st century in Jerusalem, kept 
in El Salvador Cathedral of Oviedo, Spain, since the mid-8th century (Guscin, 1998), 120 points of congruent 
bloodstains between the Sudarium and the Shroud. (6) Portrait of Jesus, Knights Templar, Templecombe, 
England, 14th century (Morgan, 1998), 125 PC. Of significance herein is that on many of the early icons and 
on some of the 7th century coins, themselves actually numismatic icons, a number of flower images are 
depicted quite accurately as to their modern location in relation to the facial image. This suggests that the 
actual Shroud and its attendant imagery served as the model for these icons and that these images were 
probably much clearer in earlier centuries (Whanger & Whanger, 1998)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, 
U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, 
pp.6-7)

6/08/2007
"Botanical investigation of the Shroud began with Dr. Max Frei's observations of pollen grains on the 
Shroud in 1973 (Frei, 1978). A decade later, faint floral images on the Shroud linen were first noted in 1983 by 
O. Scheuermann (1984) and in 1985 by Whanger and Whanger (1989). Further taxonomic identification and 
botanical verification proceeded slowly until the present team of authors began research collaboration in 
1995. Max Frei earned his Ph.D. in Botany and was an internationally known criminalist (expert in gathering 
and interpreting forensic evidence). He was the founder and director of the scientific department of the 
Zurich Criminal Police in Switzerland. He developed the method of pressing and massaging transparent 
sticky tape onto material surfaces to sample pollen grains and other debris for microscopic examination. He 
then removed individual pollen grains from sticky tapes by micro dissection, remounting them for 
examination by light and scanning electron microscopy. He was very familiar with European pollen grains, 
having examined them regularly for more than 25 years (Bulst, 1984). In 1973, Frei was invited to Turin for a 
brief private viewing of the Shroud (Frei, 1978) to confirm the accuracy of photographs taken in 1969. While 
examining a corner of the Shroud under a stereoscopic microscope, he noted dust deposits. Requesting 
permission to take sticky tape samples, he obtained 12 and sealed them in situ. On later examination of the 
sticky tapes, numerous pollen grains were noted. However, at that time Frei was unable to identify most of 
them. He therefore inferred that they were not of European origin. Assuming a Middle Eastern origin for the 
Shroud, Frei undertook seven expeditions over the next several years to diverse localities there. He gathered 
botanical specimens with pollen grains to serve as controls and comparison with those found on the 
Shroud. Eventually, Frei putatively identified 48 pollen grains at least to genus level." (Danin, A., Whanger, 
A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis 
MO, 1999, p.7)

6/08/2007
"In 1978, Frei was again given permission to remove an additional 27 sticky tape samples from the Shroud 
(Frei, 1982, 1983). He chose various representative sites, being unaware of any floral images on the Shroud. 
He also obtained more dust aspirated from the Shroud, subsequently identifying the pollen grains of ten 
additional plants (Frei, 1983). Frei died in 1983 before he could finish the survey of the sticky tapes from 
1978. Some of these materials were later surveyed and photographed by Maloney (1988, 1989). However, 
little further work was done with the Frei materials until the collection was acquired in 1993 by the Council 
for Study of the Shroud of Turin (CSST). In 1998, Uri Baruch joined the team to conduct palynological 
studies of the samples collected by Frei and to taxonomically determine the taxa to which the pollen grains 
belonged." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri 
Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.7-8)

6/08/2007
"The origin of the images on the Shroud has long been debated, with various hypotheses for their formation 
proposed. Several processes for producing detailed, non-photographic, non-artistic images of floral material 
have been described. In the 1850s, Carl Ettingshausen developed a process of `nature printing,' in which a 
plant was pressed between a plate of soft lead and one of steel, resulting in an image in the lead that could 
be used in printing (Ettingshausen, 1858). W. J. Russell (1897) noted that leaves would produce images on 
photographic emulsions in total darkness, presumably through trace amounts of hydrogen peroxide. In the 
1930s, Jean Volckringer (1942) observed that pressed plants mounted and stored in herbaria left very 
accurate images of themselves on paper sheets and folders. These darkened images were produced by 
cellulose degradation, although the exact mechanism is not clear. In the earlier part of this century Semyon 
Kirlian used corona discharge to produce images of leaves and other objects on film (Kirlian & Kirlian, 1961). 
Somewhat later, x-rays were used to produce images of the internal structures of flowers on electrostatically 
charged selenium plates, in an early but technically xeroradiographic process (Greco & Greco, 1986). Mills 
(1995) proposed that the image formation may have been from the release of single oxygen free radicals from 
dying superficial cells oxidatively degrading the linen." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, 
M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.8)

6/08/2007
"STURP research initiated in 1978 confirmed the presence of blood on the Shroud but found no 
pigments, stains, or dyes, confirming that it is not a painting. These Shroud images occur only on the 
top surface fibrils on the crowns of the linen fibers. These images suggest cellular oxidations yielding 
conjugated carbonyl groups as chromophores [Jackson, J.P., Jumper, E. & Ercoline, W., "Correlation of 
image intensity on the Shroud of Turin with the 3-D structure of a human body shape," Applied 
Optics, 23(14), 1984, pp.2244-2270]. The physics of the images is well known: it is extremely superficial 
with their density being directly proportional to the distance from the body to the cloth (Schwalbe & 
Rogers, 1982). Three-dimensional information is thus encoded into the images. Because there are 
images on the Shroud in places where the cloth was not in actual contact with the imaged object (not 
further than about 4 cm from the body), it has been increasingly hypothesized that some type of 
ionizing radiation would be necessary to produce such images. However, no single mechanism for the 
ionization could be postulated (Jackson et al., 1984). Recently, two physicists independently 
speculated that corona or electrostatic discharge might have produced the images. Mills (1979) 
discussed iconography. Scheuermann (1983, 1984) recorded his speculations and numerous experiments 
producing coronal discharge images from various kinds of objects." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., 
Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis 
MO, 1999, p.8).

6/08/2007
"In 1979, Filas (1982) noted over the right eye area on an Enrie photograph the tiny letters `UCAI' (a 
misspelling of `UKAI') and something like a shepherd's crook. He speculated that this might be the image of 
a Pontius Pilate lepton (the `widow's mite' coin of Israel), which is a coin with a similar design. In 1982, on a 
coin with the same design, which Filas obtained from a numismatist, he discovered the same `C' misspelling. 
In 1982, Whanger and Whanger, using their Polarized Image Overlay Technique, reported that the Shroud 
had been the model for exacting productions on icons and coins in the 6th and 7th centuries. They then 
contacted Filas to offer the use of their technique to compare his coin with the image over the right eye. This 
comparison showed remarkable similarities, with a correspondence of 211 PC between the two images, 
showing that the Filas coin is a die-mate of the one whose image is over the right eye (Whanger & 
Whanger, 1985). Later in 1982, while viewing the coin comparison, Alan D. Adler noticed that the image on 
the Shroud was produced from the irregular surfaces and high points of the coin. This pattern of image 
production is characteristic of corona discharge and provided real evidence from the Shroud itself of how 
the image was formed. Scheuermann's work with coronal imaging was essential to the later identification of 
images of various objects associated with the Shroud (Whanger & Whanger, 1998)." (Danin, A., Whanger, 
A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis 
MO, 1999, pp.8-9)

6/08/2007
"In 1983, Scheuermann first noted the presence of flower images on the Shroud. After first noting a 
Chrysanthemum-like image in 1985, Whanger and Whanger tentatively identified 28 kinds of floral objects 
using Flora Palaestina (Zohary, 1966, 1972; Feinbrun, 1978) as a taxonomic reference. Essential to further 
identification of botanical imagery associated with the Shroud was its review of the material in 1995 by 
Danin (1997) and subsequent confirmation by Danin and Baruch (1999)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., 
Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 
1999, pp.8-9)

6/08/2007
"Heller and Adler (1981) would recognize several kinds of color on the Shroud, explaining their chemistry. 
Colored areas appearing as bloodstains actually do contain components of human blood (Bollone et al., 
1983a, 1983b). These bloody stains are not superficial, soaking the linen to its entire thickness. Yellow-
colored fibrils comprising the Shroud images are evident only as the top surface fibrils on the linen fiber 
crowns. Non-imaging linen fibrils appear off-white in color. Color and contrast in a given area on the Shroud 
are produced from the actual number and patterning of yellow and white fibrils (Jackson, 1991). Miller's color 
micrographs (at 64x and 32x levels of magnification respectively) of these different linen fibrils composing 
the Shroud are presented by Weaver (1980: 742) and also by Lavoie (1998: 53-57) and Iannone (1998). 
Differences also exist between image and non-image fibrils in their fluorescence on the linen (Adler, pers. 
comm.). Image or yellowish fibrils are not fluorescent, appearing black in fluorescence photos, whereas 
nonimage off-white linen fibrils do fluoresce and appear green (Miller & Pellicori, 1981). Modern or new 
cellulose fibers appear light blue under fluorescence, with linen often being blue-white in appearance due to 
starch used in linen processing. Fruit pectins illuminate green-yellowish in color under fluorescence." 
(Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical 
Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.9)

6/08/2007
"Image deterioration over the centuries may be partially due to the repeated folding and unfolding of the 
cloth, which cause surface fibrils to flake off. Image resolution also suffers by the progressive oxidative 
yellowing of the entire linen fabric so that pale yellow monochrome images increasingly blend into a 
yellowing and aging linen background (Adler & Schwalbe, 1993). Scheuermann (1983) speculated that the 
images on the Shroud might have been produced by coronal electrostatic or electron emission discharge. He 
experimented with a Van de Graaf generator that produced high-voltage, high-frequency electricity. This 
form of electricity flows over the surfaces of all objects in its field, discharging from irregular surfaces and 
high points in the form of streamers or corona. He produced images on photographic film by placing an 
object contiguous to film and between the two electrodes. Later, he produced images on linen 
(Scheuermann, 1984). After floral images were found on the Shroud, as a test Scheuermann produced corona 
images from diverse plant material, including leaves, stems, thorns, as well as flowers in various stages of 
wilting, fruits, and bouquets. Corona images may be partial or fragmented; originating off margins, rough 
surfaces, and high points of plant material; they may be either positive or negative or light or dark in tone, 
and depending on distance and other conditions such as diffraction effects." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., 
Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 
1999, p.9)

6/08/2007
"The purpose of the present paper is to correlate the occurrence of plants associated with the Shroud of 
Turin as either pollen grains or plant images with modern geographical distributions of botanical taxa. A 
possible Middle Eastern origin of the Shroud of Turin will be explored. Sticky tape slides and other materials 
collected by Frei in 1973 and again in 1978 were studied microscopically at 100x and 800x magnifications 
using a computerized Olympus AX-70 research light microscope. In deducing Shroud pollen, Baruch 
compared grain morphology with control specimens prepared independently by Frei, Danin, and Baruch. 
The reference collection prepared by Danin in 1996 and 1997 was made using Frei's sticky tape method, 
whereas that of Baruch was in the conventional acetolysis method, which permits better visualization of 
exine details. It should be noted that poor optical quality of most samples (caused by the covering sticky 
tapes) and pollen grain deterioration prevented in many cases positive identification of the grains and in 
many other cases did not permit determination beyond the most basic level (usually the family level). Due to 
a very restrictive protocol in treating Frei's samples, acetolysis and destructive examination of them are 
impossible. Throughout most of the study, the 100x oil objective was not used because of the fear that the 
immersion oil might damage the sticky tapes. Immersion oil and examination at 1000x were only used for one, 
late sample (tape 6Bd)." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of 
Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.10-11)

6/08/2007
"In addition to the Frei sticky tapes taken from the Shroud in 1973 (Table 1) and 1978 for pollen grains, other 
related materials were also examined. This included three samples from the Sudarium of Oviedo, the 
traditional face cloth (John 20:7), which would have been wrapped around the head to cover the disfigured 
face until enshroudment. The Sudarium, which has only bloodstains and no image, has been housed in 
Oviedo, Spain, continuously since the mid-8th century (Guscin, 1998). In 1979, Frei took 46 sticky tape 
samples from the Sudarium. All except three of these were removed from his collection shortly after his death 
and were not available for examination." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of 
the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.11)

6/08/2007
"Photographs of the Shroud have been taken from 1898 to the present day. Analyzing these photographs 
and/or their negatives for plant images assisted determination of plant species. First known photographs of 
the Shroud, taken in 1898 by Secondo Pia, were partially studied as negatives in Museo Della Sindone and 
Archivio di Stato, both in Turin, Italy. Giuseppe Enrie used black-and-white orthochromatic film (1931) 
mostly on 40 x 50 cm plates with a yellow filter to enhance contrast (LaRue, 1977). Second- and third-
generation prints from his negatives have been the source of almost all of the photographs used in the 
research reported in this paper. Three full-size first-generation prints made directly from Enrie's original 
negatives were also used. Several thousand photographs were also taken in 1978 under the direction of 
Vernon Miller, at the time of the STURP scientific study. They were taken in color, and in black and white; 
with reflected and back lighting; and using ultraviolet, infrared spectroscopy, infrared thermography, x-ray 
fluorescence, and x-radiographic imaging. A number of these can now be viewed on the Internet at 
<http://www.shroud.com>. Barrie Schwortz was the documenting photographer (Devan & Miller, 1982). We 
used several kinds of these photographs in comparing the same plant images in the photographs from 1898, 
1931, and 1978." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," 
Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.11)

6/08/2007
"The reason for the reexamination of the slides studied by Frei in 1973 (Table 1) is that some of his 
determinations seem to be more explicit than can really be determined for the taxa in question. For instance, 
pollen grains of the large family Chenopodiaceae can only be determined to subfamilial groupings. In some 
cases, because of the sticky tape covering and of heavy deterioration of the grains, Frei's determinations 
(Frei, 1982) could be only partially confirmed. Frei placed the sticky tapes in the locations detailed in Figures 
1 and 2. Shroud photographs in Figures l, 2, 6, and 7 are printed as a photographically reversed negative, 
offering better positive contrast for the figure. An opened anther with a few pollen grains inside is seen in 
Figure 3 and is associated with tape 6Bd. However, we cannot identify it by its morphology. Pollen 
morphology was obscured by the sticky tape as well as by the anther wall. Results of the examination of 
Frei's 1978 collection of sticky tapes (by Baruch) are summarized in Table 2. Some results presented in Table 
1 are incorporated into Table 2 (the column marked 1973). No pollen grains were found either on tape 12Aa 
or on another one that had no label (FC-ST-17 in CSST archive). The most common positively identified 
pollen type among the 313 grains analyzed by us (Tables 2 and 3, Figures 4 and 5) is that of Gundelia 
tournefortii L., comprising 91 grains (29.1%). These are 44.6% of all the pollen grains with positive 
identification. Also common was a pollen type recognized as Cistaceae, comprising 23 grains (7.3%), and 
Apiaceae, comprising 13 grains (4.2%). The large amount of unidentified grains (109 = 34.8% of total 
counted pollen) results from the optical limitations caused by the sticky tapes. Even the use of immersion oil 
(with sample 6Bd, Table 2) did not significantly help our determinations. Unlike grains mounted in silicon 
oils, grains under the sticky tapes are in a fixed position and thus cannot be micromanipulated. It is hoped, 
however, that future higher-resolution studies, including studies of freshly aspirated samples from the 
Shroud (if permitted), will allow scanning electron microscopy or mounting in silicon oil. Such methods may 
enable us to reduce the number of unidentified grains." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, 
M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.13)

6/08/2007
"Frei noted that there were far fewer pollen grains on the tapes taken from the Sudarium than on those taken 
from the Shroud. On examining one of our three slides with material from the Sudarium, two pollen grains of 
Gundelia tournefortii were discovered among eight pollen grains. These grains are not included in the 
tables presenting pollen analysis." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the 
Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.13)

6/08/2007
"Plant images are rather difficult to see directly on the Shroud. After Danin observed and marked hundreds 
of flowers on enhanced photographs, he discovered two floral images, Zygophyllum dumosum (Figure 6, 
10) and Pistacia lentiscus (Figure 6, 5), during the permitted two minutes of observation of the Shroud 
itself during its 1998 exhibition. However, photographically enhanced photos from negatives made by Enrie 
(in 1931) are excellent tools for discovering plant images on the Shroud. We do not report all the plants 
evident to us, as some images require further study." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, 
M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.16)

6/08/2007
"Chrysanthemum cf. coronarium (Asteraceae) is one of the most prominent plant images on the Shroud, 
located in Figure 6, 1. In Figure 8, printed at a scale of 1:1, the image on the Shroud (at the center) is 
compared to an image of a capitulum of Chrysanthemum coronarium drawn by Koppel for Flora 
Palaestina (1978, on the right) and to a coronal electric discharge produced by Scheuermann (1984) from 
another species of Chrysanthemum growing in Germany. In the Shroud image, the dark marks, which are 
derived presumably from a high concentration of yellow fibrils, are at the periphery of the ray florets of each 
capitulum and at the periphery of the disc of tubular florets. The marks resemble the pattern in 
Scheuermann's electric-discharge photos. Being a widespread Mediterranean species that grows in most 
districts of Israel and Jordan (Danin, 1998: 123), Chrysanthemum coronarium is only suggestive and is not 
a conclusive geographical indicator for the Shroud. However, it is one of the clearest plant images we can 
perceive, and we use it for demonstrating the botanical findings. In Israel and its neighboring countries, 
there are an additional three species of Chrysanthemum. We consider the images of capitulae on the 
Shroud as Chrysanthemum cf. coronarium because their highest resemblance is to this species." (Danin, 
A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.16)

6/08/2007
"A bouquet of 8 or 9 flowers best corresponding to the morphology of Cistus creticus (Cistaceae) is 
situated below Chrysanthemum cf. coronarium (Figure 6, 2). The identity of this plant may be further 
confirmed when the 13 pollen grains of the Cistaceae-type observed on tape 6Bd (Table 2) are studied with 
light microscopy at higher resolution. The predictive value of Cistus creticus for geographic and historic 
associations of the Shroud is high. It inhabits the Mediterranean zones of Israel and does not grow in the 
semi-steppe bathas (Danin, 1998). In the Jerusalem area it grows at present as far east as 4-5 km west of the 
Old City." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri 
Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.16)

6/08/2007
"The image of the Gundelia tournefortii (Asteraceae) inflorescence is found on the shoulder (Figure 6, 8). 
The large number of flowers in G. tournefortii heads may explain the high frequency of this pollen type. 
Pollen grains of insect-pollinated species are rare in the pollen rain of the Israel study area (Baruch, 1993). 
Therefore, the high density of G. tournefortii pollen grains on the Shroud, as displayed in Table 2 (each 
sticky tape = ca. 5 cm^2), can best be explained by as being of a local origin. This suggests that the floral 
pollen source was close to where the grains were found on the Shroud. Gundelia tournefortii may serve as 
an indicator plant for the entire assemblage of plants associated with the Shroud. Its phenology is also 
indicative for chronology of the Shroud; Gundelia tournefortii blooms in Israel between March and May 
(Feinbrun-Dothan & Danin, 1991). Following Kupicha (1975), Gundelia tournefortii becomes not only a 
temporal indicator but also a geographical one (Figure 9). It is a plant of primary habitats and does not grow 
in disturbed soils. It grows in semi-steppe bathas and herbaceous formations subsumed by arboreal 
vegetation only slowly. It also grows at the center of the Mediterranean territory of Israel in bathas or 
shrubby formations that develop as seral communities in old fields succession. The isohyet of 200 mm 
represents the lowest limit boundary for its growth towards the desert." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, 
U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, 
pp.16,18)

6/08/2007
"The physical location of the bouquet containing Zygophyllum dumosum appears on the body image's 
upper chest (Figure 6, 10). Here, two young but well-developed succulent leaves are visualized. Each leaf 
has a terete petiole and a pair of flat leaflets (Figures 10 to 12). Such leaves, in the Near Eastern flora, are 
found only in the genus Zygophyllum. The images of two single petioles marked in this area are of at 
least 1-year-old leaves. The only species of Zygophyllum in Israel and its neighboring countries that 
sheds its pair of leaflets annually is Z. dumosum (Zohary, 1972; Feinbrun-Dothan & Danin, 1991). The top 
leaf in Figures 10 and 11 was seen in all the five kinds of photographs dealt with in Table 5. The fact that the 
Zygophyllum leaf image is black in the fluorescence photo means that the image is made up of the image-
linen type fibrils that do not fluoresce. The chronological significance of Z. dumosum in the phenologic 
stage of bloom seen on the Shroud (it has a flower and two kinds of leaves) is that it was cut between the 
months of December and April (in the context of the Judean Desert). This is the particular season when both 
leaf types and flowers are found together on the plant." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, 
M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.18)

6/08/2007
"The geographical implications of Z. dumosum are significant beyond that of other species associated 
with the Shroud because the plant is endemic (Figure 9). Zygophyllum dumosum grows only in Israel, 
Sinai, and a small area of Jordan (Figure 13). This assemblage of Z. dumosum and additional species such 
as Gundelia tournefortii, Cistus creticus, and Capparis aegyptia occurs in only one rather small spot 
on earth, this being the Judean mountains and the Judean Desert of Israel, in the vicinity of Jerusalem." 
(Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical 
Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.18)

6/08/2007
"Pistacia lentiscus (Anacardiaceae) (Figure 6, 5) was first identified by the Whangers on the Shroud by 
its image resemblance to Koppel's (1972) drawing in Flora Palaestina (Figure 14). Fruits of Pistacia 
species on the Shroud are seen in two states. The three fruits mentioned above are attached to their straight 
peduncle and are dark-colored in all the five image sources listed in Table 5. Discovered on Enrie's enhanced 
photos, they were again observed at the same location on Pia (1898) negatives and Enrie (1931) prints and 
negatives in Turin, as well as on Miller (1978) color and fluorescence photos (Table 5). They are further 
visually evident on the Shroud itself (Danin, 1998, pers. comm.). There are additional hundreds of detached 
Pistacia fruits with longer pedicels than those seen in Figure 14. Several small groups of these fruits are 
marked No. 6 in Figure 6. One prominent concentration of such Pistacia fruit images is presented in Figure 
15. Fresh fruits of the three species of Pistacia do not occur during the season indicated by the 
phenologic states of Gundelia tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum. Therefore, these fruits would 
have been brought out from stored sources. Modern practice (as was explained by a spice-merchant in the 
market of the Old City of Jerusalem) is that the Pistacia fruits (BUTUM in Arabic) are picked when ripe in 
September and then preserved by drying to be sold year round (Figures 16 and 17). Mixed within the fruits 
displayed in Figure 14 were peduncles of Pistacia atlantica and P. palaestina as presented in Figure 17 
(cf. Huber, 1972). Both species are used as condiments for cakes and as components of the spice Za'atar 
(made from marjoram powder, sesame seeds, sumac [Rhus coriaria L.], and salt). Being commercially 
preserved plant parts, the three Pistacia species cannot serve as geographical or chronological indicators, 
because no one can tell from where the fruits had been brought to the unknown storage place." (Danin, A., 
Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.18,20)

6/08/2007
"In determining Capparis aegyptia (Capparaceae) (Figure 6, 9), the morphological features of the large-
flowered capers were used first (Figure 18). There are three species with such large opening buds in the flora 
of Israel (the geographic area where Gundelia tournefortii, Zygophyllum dumosum, and Cistus 
creticus converge). One species that blooms concurrently with Gundelia tournefortii is C. aegyptia 
(sensu Feinbrun-Dothan & Danin, 1991). This species has a distributional area in Israel, Jordan, and Sinai 
resembling that of Zygophyllum dumosum; however, its distribution area is larger than that of Z. 
dumosum. Capparis aegyptia grows also in mainland Egypt, with its distribution extending westward. 
Additional information on this caper species and its significance is presented later (Figure 25)." (Danin, A., 
Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.20)

6/08/2007
"Ridolfia segetum (Apiaceae) (Figure 19), located left of the head at the dorsal side (Figure 7, 7), is a 
common Mediterranean annual, which grows in vertisols (deep clayey soils). Its main area of growth is the 
lowlands west and northwest of Jerusalem. Individuals also occur in the valleys of the Jerusalem area. It 
does not grow under desert conditions." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of 
the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.20)

6/08/2007
"Whanger and Whanger (1998) discovered a sponge tied to a stick (Figure 7, 13). Further studies of the stick 
revealed a typical node of a perennial reed grass. Three reed grasses (Poaceae) occur in Israel: Phragmites 
australis (Cav.) Steud. and Arundo plinii Turra have stems with a relatively thin diameter of commonly 
up to 10 mm; Arundo donax has stems 10 to 30 mm in diameter. The diameter of the stem image on the 
Shroud (Figure 20) is 10 to 16 mm, corresponding best to Arundo donax. A hand-made rope, such as that 
in Danin (1983: 128-129; 1995), has an undulating margin, the profile of which resembles the image in Figure 
21, located at Figure 7, 14. Similar images are apparently common in the area of the three spots marked 14 (in 
Figure 7). The cumulative length of ropes, provided that all are parts of one folded rope, is approximately 10 
m. A long, narrowly triangular image (Figure 7, 15, at the lower right side) on the Shroud linen has small dark 
spots along almost parallel lines making the image. This image resembles brooms made in the Middle East 
from the cultivar Sorghum vulgare var. technicum (Poaceae) (Figure 22). These dark, circular spots 
correspond to the grass spikelets each containing one grain, often found in brooms of this kind." (Danin, A., 
Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.20-21)

6/08/2007
"Confirmation that the plant images are not a result of artifacts of photographic enhancement of Enrie's 
(1931) negatives is provided by the identical images discovered on photos taken by other photographers. A 
few of the most significant images were discovered and confirmed (by Danin) in several additional sources 
(Table 5). There are differences of 80 and 45 years between the three photographic intervals, all by different 
investigators, by different cameras, with different optical qualities, with different film emulsions and spectral 
characteristics, as well as film development under different darkroom conditions. Yet, many significant 
images were consistently observed in the photos of different generations. These similarities establish that 
the images are not artifacts of photography, but are part of the nature of the Shroud." (Danin, A., Whanger, 
A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis 
MO, 1999, p.21)

6/08/2007
"Examples of corona discharge are presented in Figures 8, 23, and 24. The Chrysanthemum specimen 
(Figure 8) resembles the most prominent floral image on the Shroud (Figure 6, 1). There is darkening of the 
photographic paper, at the margin of the ligulate florets and at the periphery of the disc florets. The rose leaf 
(Figure 23) displays a similar imaging where the serrate leaf margins prominently appear on the coronal 
discharge photo. The juicy fruit of Berberis (Figure 24) induced the formation of a fully dark oval image. 
Because it touches the photographic paper, it has sharper margins. Other fruits in Scheuermann's collection, 
slightly distant from the photographic paper, lacked these sharp margins. We used this fruit as a 
photographic model in understanding the Pistacia fruits." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & 
Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.21)

6/08/2007
"The distributional areas of the most significant species are used here to determine the proposed place of 
origin of the Shroud (the geographical fingerprint of the Shroud of Turin). Their significance is based on the 
following criteria: the highest frequency of pollen, endemism, and from which side of the Jordan river the 
first two were taken. A plant assemblage composed of two species is used for the first geographic 
approximation. These are Gundelia tournefortii, which has the highest frequency of pollen grains derived 
from the Shroud, and Zygophyllum dumosum, images of which are documented in both photographs and 
on the Shroud itself. Those biogeographic areas where the two species coexist are bounded by longitudinal 
lines linking Jerusalem and Hebron in Israel and Madaba and Karak in Jordan. Adding Cistus creticus as a 
third species to this plant assemblage anchors the area of origin toward the Jerusalem-Hebron zone. Future 
investigation of additional pollen grains from the Shroud may further pinpoint the place of origin indicated 
by the Shroud's flora." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of 
Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.21-22)

6/08/2007
"The species examined here have precise reproductive intervals or periods of times of blooming or of 
carrying leaves. Their phenology may serve as an indication of the time of year when they were brought to 
the Shroud. Table 6 indicates floral anthesis, after Feinbrun-Dothan and Danin (1991), for the eight most 
significant plants associated with the Shroud. For all eight plants, their concurrent blooming times fall in the 
months of March and April." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud 
of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.22)

6/08/2007
"Capparis aegyptia is also significant as an indicator for the time of day when its flowering stems were 
picked. Flowering buds of this species begin to open at about midday, opening gradually until fully opened 
about half an hour before sunset. Flowers seen as images on the Shroud correspond to opening buds at 
about 3-4 o'clock in the afternoon." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the 
Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.22)

6/08/2007
"The two plant species identified as part of the Shroud, beyond any reasonable doubt, are Gundelia 
tournefortii and Zygophyllum dumosum. Their presence on the Shroud, with the former confirmed by its 
pollen grains and both identified by presumed imaging, indicate that the Shroud originated in the spring 
season (March-April) in the Jerusalem area. The high indicative value of Gundelia tournefortii's pollen 
grains derives from the fact that it is a monotypic genus (Feinbrun-Dothan, 1978). For the Near East, its 
pollen morphology is unique for the family and for the entire flora. Zygophyllum dumosum is an endemic 
plant with unusual leaf morphology. Leaves of the present year are produced at the beginning of winter as 
paired leaflets on a terete petiole while those of previous years can be seen to lack this leaflet pair. The 
cooccurrence of these two species on the Shroud suggests that they were placed with the body prior to the 
process that caused the formation of images on the cloth. The high density of pollen grains from Gundelia 
tournefortii, an insect-pollinated species, indicates that an actual entire inflorescence or several 
inflorescences may have been placed inside the folded cloth. The image of a G. tournefortii inflorescence 
(Figure 6, 8) offers confirmation of this. The shape of Zygophyllum dumosum leaves and their comparison 
to corona discharge images made by Scheuermann suggest that fresh Zygophyllum dumosum branches 
were placed on the chest of the body prior to the formation of all the images. The image of the Z. 
dumosum leaf was produced by dehydrative oxidation of cellulose linen fibrils in direct contact with this 
leaf, as discussed previously. This is supported by its black image color in the fluorescence photograph. 
The images of these two species together with the pollen grains of G. tournefortii corroborate the 
following sequence of events: (1) laying the body on the linen; (2) placing flowering plants and other 
objects along with the body; (3) folding of the cloth over the body; as well as (4) the process that caused 
the formation of the images." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud 
of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.23)

6/08/2007
"The finding of Gundelia tournefortii pollen on the Shroud with its Near Eastern predictive value is a 
striking observation. That G. tournefortii pollen also occurs on the Sudarium of Oviedo adds to the strong 
link between these two traditional burial cloths. Independent indication for this linkage has already been 
established by the presence of about 120 congruent blood stains on the two cloths (Whanger & Whanger, 
1998). The blood on the Shroud of Turin is of the group AB (Bollone et al., 1983a, 1983b). Guscin (1998: 56) 
reported `Dr. Baima Bollone spoke about the blood on the Sudarium (of Oviedo), confirming that it is human 
blood of the group AB, the same group as the blood on the Shroud.' However, Adler (1999) suggested that 
ancient blood stains may be hard to interpret. This pollen association, congruence of blood patterning, and 
probable identical blood type suggests the radiocarbon dating of the Shroud to only the Middle Ages 
(Damon et al., 1989) as untenable. The list of species found as pollen grains collected from the Sudarium of 
Oviedo (Gomez-Ferreras, 1994) does not include G. tournefortii." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & 
Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.23-
24)

6/08/2007
"Images of Capparis aegyptia flowers, which display a distinctive anthesal pattern during daylight hours, 
have been discovered on the Shroud. The process of buds opening ceases when picked and when no water 
is supplied. Their images on the Shroud (Figure 6, 9) suggest they were picked in the Judean Desert or the 
Dead Sea Valley between 3 and 4 p.m. on the same day they were placed on the Shroud." (Danin, A., 
Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden 
Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.23-24)

6/08/2007
"Future collection of additional pollen grains by aspiration would permit further pollen identification. The 
greater the number of identified plant species, the more the area of their geographical coincidence and 
blooming season may be indicated. Present-day floristic distributions for Israel remain similar to those over 
the last 4,000 years (Danin, 1995), although there are changes in species assemblages resulting from the joint 
impact of humans and domestic animals. Gundelia tournefortii ('aqouvit hagalgal' or `galgal' in Hebrew; 
Zohary, 1982) was used by Isaiah (17:13) to indicate the tumbleweed nature of the advancing Sennachareb-
the king of ancient Assyria (HaReuveni, 1957). Contemporaneous peoples in Jerusalem then certainly had 
knowledge of what `galgal' was and its life cycle, because of its use as a symbol. References to `galgal' by 
Isaiah and in other Biblical proverbs indicate its presence and use by people approximately 2,700 years ago." 
(Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical 
Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, p.24)

6/08/2007
"Pollen distribution as displayed in Tables 2 and 3 indicates two patterns of palynological occurrence, those 
taxa that are common and represented in high percentage (representing 5% of total pollen), and other taxa 
regarded as only randomly present. All three common pollen types (Gundelia tournefortii, Cistaceae, and 
Apiaceae) are typically insect-pollinated. Half of the other 34 pollen types are wind-pollinated. This does not 
imply that the final placement of pollen on the Shroud took place by wind. Pollen analyses (Baruch, 1993) 
reveal that flowers often function as pollen traps for wind-pollinated types. Placement of flowering plants on 
the Shroud (as evidenced by hundreds of flower images) also resulted in the coincidental deposition of 
wind-blown pollen in addition to autonomous pollen. Calculations of wind velocity and wind direction from 
the Near East to Europe, a practice rather common in post-Frei literature, are therefore not necessary. The 
most common feature of the majority of flower images observed on the Shroud is that of insect-pollinated 
flowers, i.e., they have large petals forming an outer circle, and an inner circle formed by the petal base, 
anthers, and styles. In many of these biwhorled, showy flowers in Israel color differences exist between the 
two floral circles. Many flowers on the Shroud are also showy as revealed by dual-circled imagery. This 
whorled, showy nature may also give a hint as to suggest the purpose of their placement on the Shroud. 
This is not the case with the small round fruits of Pistacia species brought to the Shroud from storage 
supplies and abundantly spread along much of its length." (Danin, A., Whanger, A.D., Baruch, U. & 
Whanger, M., "Flora of the Shroud of Turin," Missouri Botanical Garden Press: St. Louis MO, 1999, pp.23-
24) 

6/08/2007
"Frei told Dr. Walter McCrone, a noted Shroud critic, that there were 1 to 2 pollen per square centimeter on 
the tapes, which indicates that there are between 47,000 and 94,000 pollen grains on the Shroud. McCrone, 
who examined the tapes on July 23, 1988, agreed with this figure (ASSIST Newsletter, June 1990, pg. 7, 
footnote 11). Frei's pollen findings were studied by Dr. Aharon Horowitz, Israel's leading palynologist, and 
Dr. Avinoam Danin, professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem (the world's expert on botany in Israel) 
who both agreed with Frei's assertion that the pollen came from Israel (ASSIST Newsletter, June 1990, pg. 
3)" (Marino, J., "The Shroud Report: The Debate Rages On." Response to Joe Nickell, "Blooming 'Shroud' 
Claims," Skeptical Inquirer, November, 1999. Academy of Religion and Psychical Research Bulletin, 
March 2000. Shroud of Turin Education Project) 

6/08/2007
"Harry Gove, a physicist who took his quest to determine the age of the famed Turin Shroud all the way to 
the pope, has published a book recounting the remarkable clash between science and religion that he 
witnessed in the decade-long struggle to subject Jesus' purported burial cloth to the rigors of modern 
carbon dating. The book offers readers the first behind-the- scenes peek into the very public wrangling over 
the shroud. Gove, now a professor emeritus of physics at the University of Rochester, was one of three 
researchers who in 1977 developed accelerator mass spectrometry for carbon dating, a technology that 
definitively disproved the authenticity of the Turin Shroud 11 years later. Gove's book, Relic, Icon or Hoax? 
Carbon Dating the Turin Shroud, tells how he was soon swept into the all- encompassing debate over the 
shroud -- a relic that has mystified Christians ever since its first recorded appearance in 1353. The 14-foot by 
3-foot strip of linen bears a faint but haunting likeness of a naked man who shows all the marks of crucifixion 
described in the Bible, including strategically placed blood-like stains. It is now stored by the Roman 
Catholic Church in the cathedral at Turin, Italy. `I wasn't even aware of the Turin Shroud until my interest 
was sparked by a letter I received in 1977 from an Anglican priest who had seen an article in Time 
magazine about our work with accelerator mass spectrometry,' Gove says. `He wanted to know if this 
technology -- which accurately determines the age of artifacts by measuring carbon isotopes in samples of 
only fractions of a milligram -- might be used on the shroud.' Over the next decade, Gove and a handful of 
other would-be shroud analysts successfully took on reluctant church officials, culminating in a dramatic 
1986 meeting with Pope John Paul II followed by a workshop on procedures for dating the shroud. Gove and 
company also overcame the interference of a group of rival scientists who were certain of the shroud's 
authenticity. Finally the church relented, but it allowed tiny fragments of the shroud to be tested at only 
three institutions; much to Gove's chagrin, Rochester was not among them. `I was most disappointed (a 
monumental understatement),' he writes. `I wanted the job to be done right. Using only three labs was not 
the right way to do it.' After years of intrigue and delays, the first scientific analysis of the Turin Shroud on 
May 6, 1988 revealed it to be other than Jesus' burial shroud: The flax from which it was made was harvested 
within three decades of the year 1325. The lull in the Turin Shroud debate prompted by this finding has 
recently given way to new speculation. Some scientists, who continue to insist on the shroud's authenticity, 
have suggested that the carbon dating was skewed by contaminants on the shroud. Gove questions these 
claims. `The shroud would have to be 70 percent contaminants for the dating to be so far off,' he says." 
(Bradt, S., "New Book Reveals Scientific Controversy Surrounding Turin Shroud," University of Rochester 
News, January 31, 1997)

7/08/2007
"However, let us suppose for a while that the results obtained from the carbon dating of both the sudarium and 
the Shroud are accurate, and neither cloth ever touched the body of Jesus. In that case, the following story 
would have to be true. Sometime in the seventh century, in Palestine, after reading the gospel of John, a well 
known forger of religious relics saw the opportunity of putting a new product on the market - a cloth that had 
been over the face of the dead body of Jesus. This forger was also an expert in medicine, who knew that a 
crucified person died from asphyxiation, and that when this happened, special liquids fill the lungs of the dead 
body, and can come out through the nose if the body is moved. The only way he could get this effect on the 
cloth was by re-enacting the process, so this is exactly what he did. He crucified a volunteer, eliminating those 
candidates who did not fulfil the right conditions - swollen nose and cheeks, forked beard to stain the cloth, etc. 
When the body was taken down from the cross, he shook it around a bit with the help of a few friends, holding 
the folded cloth to the dead volunteer's nose so that future generations would be able to see the outline of his 
fingers. He even stuck a few thorns in the back of the dead man's neck, knowing that relic hunters would be 
looking for the bloodstains from the crown of thorns. Being an eloquent man, he convinced people that this 
otherwise worthless piece of cloth was stained with nothing less than the blood and pleural liquid of Christ, and 
so it was guarded in Jerusalem with other relics, and considered so genuine and spiritually valuable that it was 
worth saving first from the invading Persians and later from the Arabs. A few hundred years later, some time 
between 1260 and 1390, another professional forger, a specialist in religious relics too, decided that the time was 
ripe for something new, something really convincing. There were numerous relics from various saints in 
circulation all round Europe, bones, skulls, capes, but no, he wanted something really original. Various 
possibilities ran through his mind, the crown of thorns, the nails from the crucifixion, the table cloth from the last 
supper, and then suddenly he had it - the funeral shroud of Jesus! And not only that, but he would also put an 
image on the Shroud, the image of the man whom the Shroud had wrapped! The first step was difficult. Being an 
expert in textile weaves, (one of his many specialities, the others being pollen, Middle East blood groups, 
numismatism of the years of Tiberius, photography, Roman whips, and electronic microscopes) he needed linen 
of a special kind, typical of the Middle East in the first century. Once this had been specially ordered and made, 
he folded it up before starting his work, as a neighbour had suggested that such a cloth would have been folded 
up and hidden in a wall in Edessa for a few hundred years, so the image would be discontinuous on some of the 
fold marks. Leaving the cloth folded up, he travelled to Oviedo in the north of Spain, where he knew that a 
forerunner in his trade had left a cloth with Jesus' blood stains. On obtaining permission to analyse the sudarium, 
he first checked the blood group - AB of course, common in the Middle East and relatively scarce in Europe - 
then made an exact plan of the blood stains (carefully omitting those which would have already clotted when the 
sudarium was used) so that his stains would coincide exactly. After his trip to Oviedo, he went on a tour of what 
is now Turkey, forming a composite portrait of Jesus from all the icons, coins and images he could find. After all, 
he needed people to think that his Shroud had been around for over a thousand years, and that artists had used 
it as their inspiration for painting Christ. He didn't really understand what some of the marks were, the square box 
between the eyes, the line across the throat, but he thought he'd better put them on anyway. He didn't want to be 
accused of negligence, because he was an internationally famous forger and had a reputation to maintain. Once 
he was back home, he somehow obtained some blood (AB, naturally) and decided to begin his work of art with 
the blood stains, before even making the body image. Unfortunately, he miscalculated the proportions, and the 
nail stains appeared on the wrist instead of on the palms of the hands, where everyone in the fourteenth century 
knew that they had been. `Well', he thought, `it's just a question of a few inches, nobody will notice.' Now, even 
the omniscient author is forbidden to enter in the secret room where the forger `paints' the image of Christ, a 
perfect three dimensional negative, without paint or direction. His method was so secret that it went to the tomb 
with him. After a few hours, he opened the door, and called his wife, who was busy preparing dinner in the 
kitchen. `What do you think?' `Not bad. But you've forgotten the thumbs' `No, I haven't. Don't you know that if a 
nail destroys the nerves in the wrist, the thumbs bend in towards the palm of the hand, so you wouldn't be able 
to see them?' `But didn't the nails go through the palms?' `Well, yes, but I put the blood on first, and didn't quite 
get the distance right' `Oh, in that case ... and what about the pollen?' `What pollen?' `Well, if this Shroud has 
been in Palestine, Edessa, and let's suppose it's been in Constantinople too, it's going to need pollen from all 
those places.' Our forger loved the idea, got the pollen from all the places his wife had indicated, and delicately 
put it all over his Shroud. And then, the final touch. Two coins from the time of Christ, minted under the emperor 
Tiberius, to put over the man's eyes. Our man had a sense of humour too - he decided that the coins would be 
included in the image in such a way that they would only be visible under an electronic microscope. Such a story, 
even without the embellishments, is more incredible than the Shroud's authenticity." (Guscin, M., "The Oviedo 
Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.84-88)

7/08/2007
"The key date in the history of the sudarium is 14 March 1075. On this date the ark or chest where the 
sudarium was kept was officially opened in the presence of King Alfonso VI, his sister Doha Urraca, 
Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar (el Cid Campeador) and a number of bishops. This official act was recorded in a 
document which is now kept in the Capitular Archives of the cathedral in Oviedo, Series B.2.9. This is not 
the original document from the year 1075, but rather it is a copy, which was made in the thirteenth century. 
The copy is so exact that even the signatures are imitated - the vertical signature of Urraca is clearly legible. 
... The document states that even in the year 1075, the chest had been in the church for a long time ... The 
sudarium has been in Oviedo ever since, kept in a wooden ark. Alfonso VI had this ark covered with silver 
plating, on which the twelve apostles, the four evangelists and Christ are portrayed. There are inscriptions 
in Arabic and Latin, both of Christian origin. After the reconquest of the kingdom of Toledo, Christian-
inscriptions were often written in Arabic. The Latin inscription invites all Catholics to venerate this relic that 
contains the holy blood. The silver plating dates from the year 1113, and gives a list of the contents of the 
ark. One of these items is clearly registered as `el Santo Sudario de N.S.J.C.' These letters stand for `Nuestro 
Senor Jesucristo', and the inscription means, `The Sacred Sudarium of Our Lord Jesus Christ'." (Guscin, M., 
"The Oviedo Cloth," Lutterworth Press: Cambridge UK, 1998, pp.17-18)

8/08/2007
"On the face of it, the very idea that the linen cloth in which Jesus Christ was wrapped in the tomb should 
have survived to this day would seem incredible. It demands even more of human credulity that the cloth 
bears a photographic likeness which would seem to be that of Jesus as he lay in the tomb. Yet it is on the 
evidence for these two seemingly impossible facts that this book has been written." (Wilson, I., "The Turin 
Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, p.1)

8/08/2007
"The Shroud has always attracted controversy. Of mysterious origins, when it first appeared in the West a 
fourteenth-century. French bishop dismissed it as merely `cunningly painted,' and created `falsely and 
deceitfully.' In the early years of our own century two learned Catholic historians, Canon Ulysse Chevalier 
and the Reverend Herbert Thurston similarly condemned it as a fourteenth-century forgery." (Wilson, I., 
"The Turin Shroud," Book Club Associates: London, 1978, p.1)

8/08/2007
"Measuring 14 ft. 3 in. long by 3 ft. 7 in. wide and known to exist since at least 1354 A.D., the Shroud might 
at first appear to be an odd object for the serious studies and debates which have characterized its most 
recent history. Caught in a fire in 1532 and almost destroyed by dripping molten silver, the Shroud survived 
with a twin series of burn marks down its entire length. ... . But most compellingly, this cloth reveals the 
frontal and dorsal images of a man, the whole body of an apparent crucifixion victim. The double image, 
arranged head to head with the feet at opposite ends of the cloth, appears to have been created after being 
wrapped lengthwise around the dead body. The person apparently suffered wounds popularly associated 
with crucifixion-a pierced scalp; serious beatings in the face and down the length of the body, both front 
and back; pierced wrists and feet; and a larger wound in the side of the chest." (Stevenson, K.E. & 
Habermas, G.R., "The Shroud and the Controversy," Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville TN, 1990, pp.11-
12)

8/08/2007
"What Is the Turin Shroud? In the summer of 1978 three million tourists visited Torino (Turin), Italy. They 
had come from all over the world to wait in line and to look upon a linen cloth which had been in Turin for 
more than four hundred years. They knew that the cloth had not been shown to the general public for 
almost fifty years and that this would likely be its only display in their lifetime. As they entered the cathedral 
of St. John the Baptist they could see a large, narrow cloth measuring 14.3 feet long by 3.5 feet wide. It was 
flood-lit and was mounted in front of the main altar at the far end of the church. Gradually, as they neared 
the altar, they began to notice on the cloth an extremely faint, reddish-colored, life-sized image of a bearded 
man. The man looked strikingly like traditional images of Jesus Christ. Indeed, the cloth known as the 
Shroud of Turin is thought by many people to be the actual burial wrapping of Jesus. Both the front and the 
back of the body can be seen on the cloth. From either end the figure appears feet-head, head-feet. This tells 
us that he may have been placed on one half of the cloth. The other half would then have been pulled over 
the front of the body. There are stains on the body that resemble blood stains from an ancient Roman 
scourging and crucifixion with nails. On the front, there are trickles of blood on the man's forehead, a large 
stain on his right side, and stains from a wound in one wrist. (The other hand cannot be seen.) Both arms 
show blood runoffs from the hands to the elbows. On the back can be counted about 120 small stains which 
conform to the shape of a Roman whip. More blood trickles are seen on the back of the head. The feet are 
bloodied from apparent nail wounds. In short, the wounds on the image of the Shroud conform to the story 
of Jesus' crucifixion as told in the Gospels." (Scavone, D.C., "The Shroud of Turin: Opposing Viewpoints," 
Greenhaven Press: San Diego CA, 1989, pp.6,8. Emphasis original)

8/08/2007
"The Shroud of Turin, a large linen cloth 14 feet 3 inches long and 3 feet 7 inches wide (4.34 m x 1.10 m), 
takes its present name from the city where it has been kept for the last 422 years-Turin, Italy. In ancient 
times, burial shrouds were wrapped lengthwise around a body as shown below. Jesus would have been 
wrapped and buried in such a linen shroud. The Shroud of Turin purports to contain evidence of some of 
the most startling events in all of history: that a man who was beaten and scourged, his head pierced 
repeatedly about the crown; a man who was crucified, pierced in the side, a man who was dead and buried-
that this man was resurrected; and, further, that he was Jesus Christ. Unlike any other burial garment, this 
cloth contains the front and back images of the body of a man ... Of course, we might be tempted to dismiss 
such claims as colorful legends from the far reaches of the past, assumptions carried forth by our own 
philosophical desires. But the passage of time and the expansion of our knowledge about the world around 
us have, surprisingly, borne out these claims to greater and greater degrees. As the greatest advances in our 
knowledge have come about with increasing intensity during the twentieth century, so, too, has our 
knowledge about the enigmatic Shroud of Turin. (Antonacci, M., "The Resurrection of the Shroud: New 
Scientific, Medical, and Archeological Evidence," M. Evans & Co: New York NY, 2000, pp.1,4. Emphasis 
original)

9/08/2007
"The priests stand clustered on the high platform. Their vestments shine in the pale North European sun. 
Music plays; at the foot of the platform a choir sings, the sweet voices rising in anthems toward the tree 
tops. A deep baritone of a prayer, an invocation, follows. Beyond the bright circle of ritual, staring in 
expectation upward at the platform, a silent crowd stands pressed together. The bright robes of the rich, the 
dun jerkins of the poor; perhaps a cent or two, a brilliant pennant; perhaps a tall pavilion guarding the slim 
ladles of the nobility, the chattering ladies with their elaborate headdresses and their jewelled girdles. Seated 
above their kerchiefed peasant sisters, they feel nevertheless bound with them, with every person there, in 
an unbearable and totally absorbing curiosity. And then the moment that has gathered them - the monks 
stepping solemnly forward, the long cloth slowly unfolded, opened like some book to be read, finally 
hoisted high in the restless summer air and extended towards the waiting people. There is a great collective 
sigh from the crowd, a long moan of reverence and wonder. `The Shroud!' people are saying, more to 
themselves than to each other. 'The Shroud! Look, look - it's the Shroud of Christ!' And there indeed, 
glimpsed from a distance, shimmering in the sunlight, an image hangs before them, the image, the ultimate 
manifestation, the final evidence of the central power of their faith. And, it may be that, at this moment, the 
trumpets yell in triumph and the high voices of the choristers rise and rise in frenzied exultation. We may 
assume such a scene, imagine or recreate the moment when, in the village of Lirey, the piece of linen claimed 
to be the Shroud of Jesus was first shown to a European audience. There, amid the bright greenery of 
France, and to the disturbance of at least some of the ecclesiastical authorities, it was placed regularly on 
exhibition during the middle years of the fourteenth century. The display of relics was common enough in 
those days, and this one was not essentially different from any of the others. We remember it only because 
of the mysterious nature of the object displayed, the hauntingly inexplicable genesis of the image it bears 
and the centuries of speculation and, more recently, of research which have left us apparently still on the 
brink of miracle. Does the Shroud show the genuine imprint of the face and body of Christ? If it does not, 
whose does it show? And, whoever it displays, how was that imprint made?" (Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., "The 
Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London, 1978, pp.5-6)

9/08/2007
"In our century historians have, in a sense, had to give way to scientists in the effort to authenticate or 
discredit this strange relic. Strangely, it is the historians who have largely doubted its genuiness, while it is 
the scientists, despite the agnostics and even atheists among them, who have come to its defence. To be 
sure, their findings have on the whole been negative contributions - the Shroud can only be proved not to 
have been faked. The fact is, however, that no method of forging it thus far proposed has passed scientific 
scrutiny. The areas of possibility narrows-and continues to include the miraculous." (Brent, P. & Rolfe, D., 
"The Silent Witness: The Mysteries of the Turin Shroud Revealed," Futura Publications: London, 1978, p.6)

9/08/2007
"IN THE FACE OF it, the Shroud of Turin is an unlikely object for serious scientific study or religious 
edification. The Shroud is an old linen cloth thought by many Christians to be the burial shroud which 
Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus draped around the body of Jesus before they laid him in the tomb. This 
seems hardly possible. Furthermore, the cloth is imprinted with an image. To the naked eye, the details of 
this image are hard to discern. It is ghostly, dim, and it fades into a hazy blur as the viewer approaches the 
cloth. How plausible is the claim that this is a highly detailed image of Jesus himself as he lay in the tomb? 
Yet the Shroud of Turin will not be consigned to the category of colorful but bogus relics such as the crown 
of thorns, the crucifixion nails, and the rod of Moses. Some medieval bishops were sure that the Shroud was 
a painting, but a painting is one thing that scientists of the twentieth century who have studied the Shroud 
are sure that it is not." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the Death 
and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.3. Emphasis original)

9/08/2007
"The irony of the situation is that the mystery of the Shroud has deepened as scientists have inspected it 
with ever-more sophisticated instruments. In 1898, when the Shroud was first photographed, the image was 
found to be a negative: its light and dark values were reversed when it was `printed' on a piece of 
photographic film. This `print' was far more detailed and lifelike than the original. Then in the mid-1970s, 
microscopic examination of the cloth failed to turn up any sign of pigment, dye, ink, powder, or any other 
substance that an artist could have used to paint the image. Also in the mid-1970s, an image analyzer 
connected to a computer found that the Shroud image contains three-dimensional information, a wholly 
astounding and unexpected discovery, and one which still has no convincing explanation. ... Thus began 
the phenomenon of the Shroud. It is very much a twentieth-century phenomenon. The Shroud of Turin was 
an unexceptional relic until people began to examine it with modern scientific instruments. The result has 
been a remarkable possibility: the more we learn about the Shroud, the more likely it seems that the cloth is 
what it purports to be-the burial garment of Jesus Christ." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on 
the Shroud: Evidence for the Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, 
pp.3-4)

9/08/2007
"Millions of Christians became intensely interested in the Shroud when the photographs of the negative 
image were published in books, magazines, and newspapers throughout the world. These photos revealed a 
crucified body in extraordinary detail. Believers and nonbelievers alike could count the scourge wounds, 
observe a bloody wound in the man's side, see his pierced wrists and feet, and note the signs of a beating in 
the face. The man of the Shroud, it seemed, suffered and died very much the way the gospels say Jesus of 
Nazareth suffered and died." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the 
Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, p.4)

9/08/2007
"The phenomenon of the Shroud consists largely of intense reactions to the possibility that the Shroud is 
genuine. If archaeologists digging in a ruin somewhere in the Mediterranean world had unearthed a cloth 
imprinted with a mysterious image of some unknown person, the discovery would probably be greeted with 
a moderate amount of excitement and curiosity. But the Shroud of Turin is said to bear an image of Jesus 
Christ. Thus people's opinion of the Shroud often reflects what they think about Jesus, rather than calm 
reflection on the possibility that an object with religious value may have survived since the first century A. 
D. We should take a closer look at some of these reactions. A common response to the Shroud is instant 
disbelief: it can't be genuine. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Yves Delage, an eminent professor 
of anatomy and a well-known agnostic, read a paper to his colleagues in the French Academy in which he 
concluded that the man of the Shroud was Jesus Christ. He was greeted with derision and outrage. Every 
scientist who has seriously studied the Shroud has met with some version of this response. Instinctive 
disbelief is a common reaction. The disbelieving view-the assumption that the Shroud cannot possibly be 
genuine-has its source in something other than scientific reasoning. It is hard to believe that the actual 
burial garment of Jesus Christ, imprinted with a detailed image of his body, possibly reposes today in a 
cathedral chapel in Turin, Italy. Yet archaeological artifacts, including burial clothes, survive from times 
earlier than the first century A.D., and there are things in the universe more curious than a mysterious image 
on a linen cloth. The likely reason for instant disbelief is that the Shroud may have something to do with 
Jesus Christ, along with the suggestion, seldom entirely absent in a discussion of the Shroud, that 
something miraculous is involved in its preservation and its image. In short, the Shroud seems to offend 
something in the modern temperament. It touches a nerve. Yet, mere disbelief does not deal realistically with 
the question of the Shroud's possible authenticity. Some people are hostile to the Shroud. Madalyn Murray 
O'Hair, the noted American atheist, labeled the Shroud a fraud in a speech at Eastertime 1981. (Her speech 
was an attack on Jesus Christ and the church.) People who are hostile to the Shroud are often hostile to 
Christianity and to the man who is at the center of the Christian faith. Some single out the Shroud as an 
object of their emotional non-belief. The atheists' nonbelief mimics Christian faith, just as organized atheism 
mimics organized religion." (Stevenson, K.E. & Habermas, G.R., "Verdict on the Shroud: Evidence for the 
Death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ," Servant Books: Ann Arbor MI, 1981, pp.4-5. Emphasis original)

9/08/2007
"ON May 1, 1898, an exhibition of sacred art was opened at Turin, and the Government of His Majesty King 
Humbert authorized the public display of a very precious relic, which had belonged to the Royal House of 
Savoy since the middle of the fifteenth century. This relic (a large piece of linen cloth) was kept rolled up 
within a metal casket, secured by many locks, and was said to be the Shroud of Christ. The casket might 
only be opened with the Royal permission, and by consent of the Archbishop. The piece of cloth had only 
been previously displayed to the public six times during the nineteenth century. In 1814 by Victor Emmanuel 
I; in 1825 at the request of Pope Pius VII ; in 1822 upon the accession of Charles Felix ; in 1842 and in 1868 
at the marriages of Victor Emmanuel I and of Prince Humbert. When the exhibition of 1898 took place no one 
had seen it for thirty years. This piece of linen cloth had been known historically in the East since the year 
1353. It had been handed down by its successive owners as having been the actual Shroud of Christ, used 
when the disciples took down the body from the Cross. The brown stains visible on it were said to be the 
actual impressions left by the body. Careful inspection shows that these stains occur upon the cloth in such 
a fashion as to represent two bodies, lying head to head, the one seen from the back, the other from the 
front." (Vignon, P., "The Shroud of Christ," [1902], University Books: New York NY, Reprinted, 1970, p.9. 
Emphasis original)

9/08/2007
"Is THE SHROUD OF TURIN-the linen cloth reputed to be the garment in which Jesus was buried-a 
medieval forgery, an occult phenomenon, a proof of Jesus' resurrection? To answer this question, I traveled 
halfway around the world to interview sindonologists, sindonophiles, and just plain shroud quacks, and to 
consult specialists in the half-dozen sciences touching upon the shroud. (Sindon, by the way, is the 
Greek word for `shroud.') ... It is a weird story, a wild story, and one that is filled with not a little wonder. ... 
Pope Paul VI calls it Christianity's most important relic. What you call it will depend on how you approach 
the evidence. Approach it with a closed mind, and you will follow in the shameful steps of the English Jesuit 
and the French abbe who, at the turn of the century, claimed the shroud was a painted forgery; yet neither 
had ever examined the shroud, and both refused to accept the testimony of those who had examined it and 
said that there was no paint on the fabric. ... Approach the shroud with an open mind. Ask all the 
appropriate, necessary, difficult questions-questions such as the following: ... Do the suffering, death, and 
burial details recorded on the shroud correspond to the sufferings and death described in the Gospels? If 
the work is a forgery-a possibility that should be seriously and thoroughly entertained-how would the 
forger have accomplished his or her act? What is the statistical probability that the anonymous victim 
suffered, died, and was buried in exactly the same way as Jesus? Was the man in the shroud the man we call 
Jesus Christ? Did the man in the shroud, did Jesus, come back to life again? How, in fact, was the image 
imprinted on the cloth of the shroud? Before you accept or reject the shroud ... weigh the evidence 
encountered in books, journals, and magazines; examine the photographs of the shroud; consider the icons 
and the mandylions; contemplate the contemporary reconstructions of the man in the shroud-then, and only 
then, will you be able to decide for yourself whether the shroud of Turin is a medieval forgery, an occult 
phenomenon, or a proof of the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (Wilcox, R.K., "Shroud," Macmillan: New York 
NY, 1977, pp.ix-x. Emphasis original)

9/08/2007
"During the last six centuries, millions of words have been written about the remarkable cloth preserved at 
Turin, Italy. More recently, most of this writing has dealt with the one basic question: is it the true Shroud of 
Jesus or a man-made object? Is it-could it be-the actual winding sheet of the crucified Christ, bearing an 
imprint of His body, or is the whole thing a gigantic hoax, a fantastic forgery, of the credulous Middle Ages? 
Men of learning and renown have lined up on both sides of that compelling query. Unlike so many other 
relics of the Passion-the Cross, the Robe, the Crown of Thorns-the Turin relic does not call on tradition for 
corroboration. It bears its testimony on its surface-testimony that can be examined and investigated. Since 
the sensational photographic revelation of 1898, this examination has been conducted along a number of 
different lines: history, anatomy, chemistry, exegesis, legal medicine, photography, art history and textile 
manufacture, to name the foremost. ... Few things can compare with Shroud study in the use it makes of the 
totality of human knowledge. ... Beyond all this, of course, the relic soars into the realm of religion, where, if 
it is authentic, its value becomes immeasurable. ... Only this much is certain: The Shroud of Turin is either 
the most awesome and instructive relic of Jesus Christ in existence-showing us in its dark simplicity how He 
appeared to men-or it is one of the most ingenious, most unbelievably clever, products of the human mind 
and hand on record. It is one or the other; there is no middle ground." (Walsh, J.E., "The Shroud," Random 
House: New York NY, 1963, pp.ix-xii. Emphasis original)

9/08/2007
"Samples of pollen collected from the Shroud by commission member Frei (1978) yielded identifications of 49 
species of plants, representative of specific phytogeographical regions. In addition to 16 species of plants 
found in northern Europe, Frei identified 13 species of halophyte and desert plants `very characteristic of or 
exclusive to the Negev and Dead Sea area.' A further 20 plant types were assigned to the Anatolian steppes, 
particularly the region of southwestern Turkey-northern Syria, and the Istanbul area. Frei concluded that the 
Shroud must have been exposed to air in the past in Palestine, Turkey, and Europe. Suggestions that the 
Shroud pollen derives from long-distance wind-borne deposits or from dust from the Crusaders' boots do 
not merit serious discussion." (Meacham, W., "The Authentication of the Turin Shroud: An Issue in 
Archaeological Epistemology," Current Anthropology, Vol. 24, No. 3, June 1983, pp.283-311, p.288. 
http://www.shroud.com/meacham2.htm)

9/08/2007
"In other early cases, during the 1960s and 1970s, Max Frei, a noted Swiss criminalist, often used pollen as a 
forensic tool to link suspects to events or to crime scenes (Palenik, 1982). Some of his most noted cases 
include one in which a suspect claimed that his pistol could not have been used to commit a recent murder 
because it had not been removed from its storage box in months. However, Dr. Frei proved the suspect was 
lying because grease on the pistol contained alder and birch pollen, both of which were pollinating when the 
murder occurred, not when the suspect claimed he had last cleaned the pistol and put it away. In another 
case Dr. Frei showed that a document was a forgery because he found fall-pollinating cedar pollen stuck to 
the ink used to sign a document, which had a June date (Newman, 1984). Max Frei also gained fame for his 
pollen analysis of the Shroud of Turin, which revealed that the Shroud had probably been kept for some 
time in Israel and Anatolia (Wilson, 1978)." (Bryant, V.M., Jr. & Mildenhall, D.C., "Forensic Palynology: A 
New Way to Catch Crooks," Crime and Clues, 4 September 2006)

9/08/2007
"Instead, I want to concentrate on the botanical evidence - associated with the Shroud, about which these 
authors have written. The botanical investigation of the Shroud began in November 1973, when Dr. Max 
Frei, Director of the Zurich Police Scientific Laboratory was allowed to use Scotch tape to collect "tape 
pulls" from the surface of the Shroud. According to Walter McCrone (1996), on the sticky surface of the 
1973 tapes Frei collected slightly more than 100 pollen grains, many of which Frei then stated "made an 
unassailable case" for the Shroud's origin having been in the area of Israel/Turkey. Frei first reported these 
findings during a lecture presented in October of 1978, at The Congress of Turin. Of the 44 pollen types Frei 
reported, he claimed 34 types were from plants that grow only in Palestine (Israel) or Turkey. In McCrone's 
1996 book, Judgment Day for the Turin Shroud, McCrone reports that in 1981, Frei made a second lecture 
presentation in Turin in which he stated that a reexamination of the pollen on the original 1973 and the later 
1978 tape samples (he collected 26 additional Scotch tape samples in 1978) revealed not 34, but a total of 54 
different types of pollen each of which could be traced to plants growing exclusively in areas of Palestine 
and Turkey. The authors of the current book on the Shroud of Turin report slightly different numbers for the 
various pollen studies conducted by Frei. Nevertheless, the numbers of tapes and pollen taxa listed in both 
accounts (McCrone's book and this current book) are fairly similar, and I admit that I do not know which 
report is accurate because I do not have access to some of the original German and Italian notes, 
manuscripts, and obscure newsletter-type publications attributed to Frei and cited in both books. In an 
article Frei published in the late 1970's (Frei-Sulzer 1979) he says that he identified 48 (not 44) pollen types to 
the genus, and in some cases to the species level from the 1973 and 1978 sticky tapes." (Bryant, V.M., "Book 
Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary 
Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, p.11. 
)

9/08/2007
"Regardless of the actual number of different pollen taxa, the important issue is whether or not the pollen 
alone can verify that the Shroud had ever been in the region of Jerusalem, Israel. One of the authors of the 
current book, Uri Baruch, reexamined the pollen still stuck to the original sticky tapes, slides, and other 
materials collected by Frei in 1973 and 1978 that were donated in 1986 to the Association for Scientists and 
Scholars International for the Shroud of Turin (ASSIST) by Max Frei-Sulzer's widow. However, I can find no 
mention in any book, article, or personal letter indicating how the sticky tape samples or other pieces of 
evidence collected by Frei were stored and protected between the time of their collection and the most 
recent reexaminations conducted during the late 1990s. In an effort to confirm the pollen taxa reportedly 
found by Frei on his two sets of sticky tape samples, Baruch reexamined the various tapes and used 
comparative modern pollen reference material he collected in Israel and other pollen reference samples 
originally collected by Frei and some that were collected by botanist Avinoam Danin. After his 
reexamination, Baruch produced a pollen list, with most listed to the species level, for the current book that 
shows he was able to confirm 18 of the 47 original pollen taxa Frei reported as being found on the sticky tape 
samples he collected from the Shroud in 1973. Baruch also reexamined the pollen that was stuck on 26 
additional sticky tape samples that Frei collected from the Shroud in 1978. Baruch reports that the 1978 
sticky tapes contain a total of 313 pollen grains. Of those, Baruch says he could make a `...positive 
identification on 44.6%.' As with his reexamination of the 1973 tapes, Baruch is again able to report most 
pollen identifications from the tapes to the species level. In the 1978 sticky tape `positive ID' group Baruch 
lists 91 pollen grains of Gundelia tournefortii L., which the authors later claim, "...becomes not only a 
temporal indicator but also a geographical one." In the book's discussion section, the authors continue by 
saying, " It (Gundelia tournefortii) also grows at the center of the Mediterranean territory of Israel in 
bathas or shrubby formations that develop as seral communities in old fields succession.'" (Bryant, V.M., 
"Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and 
Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, 
pp.11-12)

9/08/2007
"Aside from the pollen data, the authors also rely upon other floral evidence to authenticate the Shroud. 
The other floral evidence consists of over 100 purported images of plant flowers, leaves, seeds, and stems 
on the Shroud, which they admit are, `Plant images (that) are rather difficult to see directly on the Shroud.' 
The authors point out that, "...photographically enhanced photos (of the Shroud from negatives made by 
Enrie (in 1931) are excellent tools for discovering plant images on the Shroud." In all, the authors report 
finding 14 specific plant taxa that are revealed as faint `images' in photos taken of the Shroud. From the 
enhanced photos the authors again note that most images are distinct enough for the plants to be identified 
to the level of both genus and species. Some of the plant images the authors show in photos are ones they 
claim represent: Chrysanthemum (cf. C. coronarium L.), Pistacia atlantica Desf., Pistacia lentiscus L., 
Gundelia tournefortii L., and Zygophyllum dumosum Boiss. Of these five taxa the authors report that, 
`...Chrysanthemum coronarium is only suggestive and is not a conclusive geographical indicator for the 
Shroud.' However, for other plant images they say, " Gundelia tournefortii may serve as an indicator plant 
for the entire assemblage... and...its phenology is also indicative for chronology of the Shroud; Gundelia 
tournefortii blooms in Israel between March and May." Finally, the authors seal their claims for the 
Shroud's authenticity by saying that the image of "...the bouquet containing Zygophyllum dumosum 
appears on the body image's upper chest. Here, two young but well- developed succulent leaves are 
visualized....... The only species of Zygophyllum in Israel and its neighboring countries that sheds its pair 
of leaflets annually is Z. dumosum." The authors then refer the reader to a map in their book showing the 
distribution of this plant. According to the map the plant grows `only' in a very restricted region of the 
Sinai Desert and in a narrow band around the Dead Sea in western Jordan and eastern Israel." (Bryant, V.M., 
"Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and 
Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, p.12)

9/08/2007
"As a botanist, I have been trained to be skeptical, and as a palynologist I am especially skeptical of pollen 
data that are not convincing. This is why I remain skeptical about the pollen evidence reported in this new 
book on the Shroud of Turin. I also do not believe that the current pollen studies can be used to 
authenticate the Shroud, mostly for the following reasons. First, I must assume that the authors based their 
precise (i.e., down to the species level) identifications of most of the pollen species mentioned in their new 
book on studies they made using only light microscopy because there is no mention of using SEM or TEM 
techniques." (Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. 
Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, 
June 2000, pp.10-14, p.12)

9/08/2007
"Second, the authors report that the basis for their pollen grain identifications was based on new studies 
they made of the original pollen trapped on the sticky tapes personally collected by Max Frei from the 
surface of the Shroud in 1973 and 1978. I have been conducting and teaching palynology for more than 30 
years and for more than a decade have been conducting forensic studies using pollen. When doing forensic 
pollen studies I have sometimes used sticky tape pulls to collect surface pollen and dust from a crime scene. 
I find that making pollen identifications from such sticky tapes is often problematical at best. Fresh pollen 
trapped on sticky tapes, especially pollen from insect-pollinated taxa, often has surface lipids and waxes that 
obscure surface morphological features. In addition, fresh pollen contains cytoplasm that makes precise 
studies using L-0 analysis and detailed examinations of exine wall structure nearly impossible. Another point 
is that when pollen remains on sticky tape too long the individual grains begin to sink into the glue. 
Depending on the size and surface ornamentation of the pollen, part or most of the grain may sink to a point 
where the surrounding glue obscures essential morphological features." (Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: 
Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 
1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, pp.12-13)

9/08/2007
"Third, much of the current authors' case for the authenticity of the Shroud rests on the precise 
identification of pollen from a single taxon, Gundelia tournefortii L. I obtained a vouchered reference 
sample of Gundelia tournefortii from one of the book's authors (Avinoam Danin). I used some of the fresh 
pollen from that sample and dusted it on cotton paper and then using Scotch tape (as Frei did) I made a tape 
pull. I also processed some of the flowers using acetolysis and then measured 50 of the processed pollen 
grains. I found that the equatorial diameter of Gundelia pollen ranged from a minimum of 35 microns up to 
a maximum of 49 microns (these measurements were made of the gain's [sic] body and excluded the spines 
and the spine bases). The average diameter for all 50 measured pollen grains was 43.92 microns. I admit that 
this size makes this pollen taxon among one of the larger ones in the Asteraceae. Nevertheless, I believe that 
size alone should not be used as the criterion to identify this pollen taxon to the species level. Gundelia 
tournefortii L. is only one of over 920 different plant genera and only one of over 19,000 separate species 
found in this large plant family (ASTERACEAE). Using only the optical resolution of a light microscope, 
some of the pollen types in this plant family can be separated to the genus level. However, less than a small 
fraction of one-percent of them can be correctly identified to the species level even at the highest levels of 
optical resolution possible when using a light microscope. Although I have not looked at all 19,000+ species 
of composites, I do not believe that Gundelia tournefortii is so unique that it could be included in that 
small fraction of one-percent of types that are absolutely unique at the light microscope level. If Gundelia 
tournefortii pollen were associated with evidence in a forensic case, I would not be willing to state under 
oath that I could confidently separate it from all other composites. If the authors of this current new book 
can do this, and can identify this pollen taxon to species, as they claim, then they should provide 
convincing evidence and a list of the techniques and criteria they used to do this." (Bryant, V.M., "Book 
Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary 
Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, p.13)

9/08/2007
"Fourth, even the authors admit that the ecological range of Gundelia tournefortii includes Israel as well 
as most of Turkey. There is purported evidence that the Shroud may have been in Constantinople, Turkey, 
at one time. If so, could the pollen, identified as being Gundelia tournefortii, have been introduced at that 
time instead of centuries earlier in Israel? Some authors who have written about the Shroud even speculate 
that these pollen grains are contaminants that could have been added on purpose at a much later time." 
(Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri 
Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, 
pp.10-14, p.13)

9/08/2007
"In addition to pollen, there are more than 100 plant images purportedly found on the Shroud that can only 
be seen in photographs with negative enhancements. These are supposed to be the images of flowers and 
plants used as grave offerings, and were placed on, or in the Shroud at the time it was used when Jesus 
died. Of the 28 different plant taxa that the authors claim can be identified from these faint images, most are 
identified to both the genus and species level. Nevertheless, the only evidence the authors provide the 
readers of this new book are some faint B&W pictures that are supposed to be the images left by 
impressions of plant parts on the Shroud. A couple of the images are impressive, but many are not. My lack 
of training in photographic processes makes me ill- equipped to judge the reliability of the photographic 
process through which these plant images appeared after being enhanced from the original 1931 negatives. 
Nevertheless, I know that there are many new photographic techniques now available and there are a variety 
of new ways to use digital enhancements of faint images. I wonder why none of those newer techniques 
were mentioned or attempted." (Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam 
Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. 
Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, p.13)

9/08/2007
"So where does this leave the controversy about the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin? I suspect not 
much has changed. Those who believe in the authenticity of the Shroud as a matter of their Christian faith 
will be happy to learn that this new book "confirms" what they have always believed. Those who have 
doubts about the age and purpose to which the Shroud is attributed will not have their doubts changed by 
the information in this new book. As skeptics, this second group will be able to find fault with the 
procedures that were used and the conclusions that were reached by the authors of this book." (Bryant, 
V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, 
and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, 
pp.13-14)

9/08/2007
"As a final comment, I want to mention that rarely have I found such total disagreement among so many 
people as to the possible authenticity of something. After initially reading this short, new book on the 
Shroud of Turin I had too many unanswered questions to write a competent book review. Therefore, during 
the next several months I read four more published books about the Shroud (The DNA of God: The True 
Story of the Scientist who Reestablished the Case for the Authenticity of the Shroud of Turin and 
Discovered its Incredible Secrets; Unlocking the Secrets of the Shroud; The Shroud of Turin: the Burial 
Cloth of Jesus Christ?, and Judgment Day for the Turin Shroud). Next, I contacted a scientist who for 
more than 30 years has worked on scientific aspects surrounding the Shroud. Finally, I found and read a 
number of articles, notes, and personal letters that were written about the Shroud. After finishing all of that 
research, I remain skeptical and note that rarely have I seen so many try to cast so much doubt on the 
personal character and professional integrity of others working on this project! In short, because I do not 
personally know most of the people who are still working on, or who originally worked on the analysis of the 
Shroud, I have no way of assessing which ones are the "good guys" and which ones are the "bad guys!" 
Regardless, one thing is certain. The mystery, authenticity, and, controversy surrounding the Shroud of 
Turin are not yet resolved. This leaves room for more research and more books on this topic, which still 
captures the interest and fascination of many people." (Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud 
of Turin," by Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical 
Garden Press. Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14, p.14)

9/08/2007
"Is the book worth the price? I suspect it is. If you are one of the faithful and are interested in the controversy 
that surrounds the Shroud of Turin, you will want this book for your library shelf. If you are a palynologist who 
wants to use this study as an example of what pollen data can, and can't tell us about past events and 
geographical places, then you also need a copy. If you are a skeptic, however, this book is unlikely to convince 
you that the Shroud of Turin is authentic. " (Bryant, V.M., "Book Reviews: Flora of the Shroud of Turin," by 
Avinoam Danin, Alan D. Whanger, Uri Baruch, and Mary Whanger, 1999, Missouri Botanical Garden Press. 
Palynos, Vol. 23, No. 1, June 2000, pp.10-14"There is no indication in the New Testament that the burial 
cloth of Jesus, or any other object connected with him, was preserved. Nevertheless, there emerged in Europe 
during the Middle Ages a thriving market not only in pieces of the True Cross but virtually every other object 
mentioned or implied in Scripture. One catalogue from that time includes the following: `A fragment of St. 
Stephen's rib; Rusted remains of the gridiron on which St. Lawrence died; A Lock of Mary's hair; A small piece of 
her robe; A piece of the Manger; Part of one of Our Lord's Sandals; A piece of the sponge that had been filled 
with vinegar and handed up to Him; A fragment of bread He had shared with His disciples; A tuft of St. Peter's 
beard; Drops of St. John the Baptist's Blood.' Like the Dutch museums that competed against each other to 
acquire van Meegeren `Vermeers,' many churches vied to become known for the number and importance of their 
relics. As early as 1071 the cathedral at Eichstatt possessed 683 relics, while by the 1520s the Schlosskirche at 
Wittenburg had 19,013 and the Schlosskirche at Halle boasted more than 21,000 such objects. Jesus' foreskin was 
preserved in at least six churches. There were countless crucifixion nails, crowns of thorns, and lances. And there 
were burial shrouds." (Dutton, D., "Requiem for the Shroud of Turin." Review of Report on the Shroud 
of Turin, by John H. Heller, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1983 & Inquest on the Shroud of Turin, by Joe 
Nickell, Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1983. Michigan Quarterly Review, Vol. 23, 1984, pp.243-255)

[top]