Shroud of Turin Is A Fake, Say Scientists

    April 21, 2014
    Kelly Weidman
    Comments are off for this post.

The Shroud of Turin, revered by many as proof positive of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, is a fake, according to non-profit group The Skeptics Society. “It’s like Big Foot. Every time someone comes up with a new theory or whatnot, it’s gets a big flurry of attention.” said co-founder Pat Linse. The Shroud received a surge of media attention over the Easter weekend, as can be expected.

The Shroud, a piece of linen cloth bearing the visage of a man’s face (if you squint a little), supposedly received this imprinting when Jesus Christ was resurrected. There have been many new observations and presentations regarding the Shroud, however there are no recent scientific breakthroughs to support any new theories.

According to the Skeptics Society, which boasts famous scientists Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson as members, the Shroud fails basic scientific tests, including the widely-accepted carbon-dating test. In 1988, the Shroud was tested and results suggest the Shroud dates back to 1260-1390 CE. Linse said the Shroud is a “highly-stylized, amature rubbing.” Though there has been much debate regarding the validity of this particular test, it has been confirmed that the results are accurate.

Despite overwhelming scientific evidence debunking the myth of the Shroud, believers are expected to flock to visit when it goes on display in 2015 in Turin, Italy. The Shroud has been on display to the public only five times in the last century, the last exhibition being in 2010. The Pope is scheduled to visit the Shroud May 24, 2015.

Image via YouTube

  • Biker

    The fact is that whether the shroud is a fake or not is inconclusive. Carbon dating has its date as indicated in this article, but other scientists have pointed out that the results were compromised because the shroud was subjected to fire in it’s past. Saying that there is “overwhelming evidence” that it is a fake is … well, it’s flatly untrue.

    Any one, scientist or otherwise, who opines that it is certainly a fake, or certainly the genuine burial shroud of Jesus Christ is mistaken or lying … including the author of this article.

    One thing for sure … given the level of scrutiny it’s been subject to … including legions of tests (all of which were unknown at the time, and all of which are inconclusive): if it is a fake, it is one HELL of a fake.

  • Jarius

    Ha. This article is laughable. “Overwhelming evidence” that the Shroud is a fake? Like, the disputed carbon dating test, and…well, I guess that’s it. After literally hundreds of thousands of hours of analysis over decades, scientists still have no idea what produced the image. But I guess atheists and skeptics have selective hearing when it comes to the evidence contrary to their worldview.