[Hindsite]

The youtube video you posted was posted in 2010, the peer reviewed journal from nuclear physicists at Cambridge I posted was published in 2016.

If you were me, who would you believe in this situation?

There is nothing really there about new carbon dating of the Shroud. That is just about the old dating that was shown to be dating a contaminated corner. There was never any question about the accuracy of the dating method, but only what they actually dated. They did not really date the shroud as the video proves. But there has been new dating of the Shroud by two or three new non-destructive methods that date the Shroud back to the time of Christ.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/2 ... 71850.html

HalleluYah
Praise the Lord

[MB.]

...that the flax from which the shroud's linen was woven was harvested between AD 1260 and
1390 at a confidence level of 95% (a mean of AD 1325 with a 33-year standard deviation).

Experts in the field do not know of any contamination that would not be removed by
one or other of the cleaning procedures used. Even if it did exist in the form of contemporary
organic carbon, which is one way the apparent age can be reduced, 64% of the shroud
sample would have to be such contamination and only 36% of 2000-year-old carbon to
change the measured date from the first century AD to the 14th century. Visible inspection
by the author of the shroud sample received by Arizona before it was cleaned made it clear
that no such gross amount of contamination was present.

The New York Times article (Haberman 1989) suggested that even the chief shroud
scientist in Turin, Professor Luigi Gonella, found the shroud dating results credible. He is
quoted as saying he "had no scientific reason to think the testing was inaccurate" but then
went on to say "Even the law of gravity may turn out tomorrow to be in error." If he is
implying that there is about as much chance that the shroud measurements are wrong as that
law of gravity is in error, then he is very confident in the results indeed.

Another argument has been made (G
Hoyas, pers commun May 2, 1989) that the part of the shroud from which the sample wascut had possibly become worn and threadbare from countless handlings and had been
subjected to medieval textile restoration. If so, the restoration would have had to be done
with such incredible virtuosity as to render it microscopically indistinguishable from the real
thing. Even modern so-called invisible weaving can readily be detected under a microscope,
so this possibility seems unlikely. It seems very convincing that what was measured in the
laboratories was genuine cloth from the shroud after it had been subjected to rigorous cleaning procedures.

Fanti supposedly got his results from the same sample used by the Oxford and Zurich studies, so how he arrived at "300 BC to 400 AD" when all three other studies arrived at a consensus of 1200-1350 is beyond me.

He's also the same guy advancing the claim that and earthquake unleashed neutrinos which artificially aged the sample to 1200-1300 which sounds like rubbish to me.

Anyway, I'm not dismissing anyone's research, and I don't know if you can read this or not (due to access issues), but the Fanti article from his conference on this is here:

https://www.matec-conferences.org/artic ... _00001.pdf

Anyway, here's the whole article:

INTRODUCTORY PAPER
SCIENTIFIC RESULTS ON THE TURIN SHROUD COMING
FROM A PADUAN UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PROJECT
Giulio Fanti
Department of Industrial Engineering, University of Padova, Italy
giulio.fanti@unipd.it, http://www.dii.unipd.it/-giulio.fanti
Abstract. Turin Shroud (TS) is a linen cloth 4.4 m long and 1.1 m wide which shows two,
front and back images of a man scourged, crowned with thorns and crucified, who died on a
cross and was stabbed in the side with a lance after his death. The Catholic Christian tradition
identifies this Man as Jesus Christ resurrected after dead, but not all are unanimous in this
identification, partly because science has not been able to give definitive answers. To try to
improve a bit the inconclusive answers to which the Science is arrived, a Research Project
entitled: “Multidisciplinary analysis applied to the Turin Shroud: study of the body image, of
possible ambient pollution and of micro-particles capable to characterize the linen fabric.” has
been assigned by the University of Padua (Italy) to the Author, who performed various studies
on this theme in collaboration with other experts, also of other Italian Universities. In reference
to the body image, that is not explainable by Science nor reproducible up to now, experimental
tests based on Corona Discharge, produced by intense electric fields, have shown that it is
possible to reproduce many of these very peculiar image features. Regarding the TS dating,
after the demonstration that the 1988 radiocarbon result is not statistically reliable, probably
because of environmental pollution, alternative dating methods based on chemical and
mechanical tests showed that its age is compatible with the period in which Jesus Christ lived
in Palestine.
1 Introduction
The Turin Shroud [1,2] (TS) is a handmade 3-1 twill linen cloth, 4.4 m long and 1.1 m wide, on which
the complete front and back images of a human body are indelibly impressed (Figure 1). The word
“shroud” corresponds to the Italian “Sindone” deriving from the Ancient Greek “σινδών = sindòn”,
meaning the burial cloth in which a corpse is wrapped. The term “sindon” seems to derive from
“sindia”, a cloth made in India.
According to the Catholic Christian tradition, the TS is the burial cloth in which Jesus Christ was
wrapped before being placed in a tomb in Palestine about 2000 years ago; for this reason, it is the
most important Relic of Catholic Christianity. Even if the Science has not demonstrated the contrary,
the Catholic Christian Church does not impose any veneration of it.
DOI: 10.1051/

Article available at http://www.matec-conferences.org or http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20153600001
MATEC Web of Conferences
There are some indications that the TS was in Palestine in the first century A.D.: for example, “De
Viris illustribus” (a manuscript by Jerome of the II century A.D.) contains a passage of the Hebrews’
Gospel in which it is reported that the Shroud was given to the servant of a priest. According to many
scholars [3] the TS was then taken in Edessa (current Salinurfa in Turkey).
The face of Christ on Byzantine coins in the VII century A.D. is very similar to that on the TS: the
engraver who coined the first face of Jesus Christ on the gold solidi of Justinian II in 692 A.D. had
only seven chances over one billion of billions to reach that the results without having looked at the
TS [2]. In 1203, a crusader noted that a church in Constantinople was accustomed to exhibiting every
Friday a cloth in which it was stated that Christ had been buried, with the figure of his body impressed
on it.
The “Shroud of Christ” appeared in Europe in 1353 at Lirey [3] in France, during a dispute for its
ownership between the owner Geoffry de Charny and the canons of Lirey with the bishop of Troyes,
Pierre d’Arcis; the king of France, Charles VI, and the anti-pope, Clemens VII, were also involved in
this dispute.
Figure 1. Face of TS. To the negative body image, the positive blood stains have been superimposed.
A fire damaged the TS in 1532, while it was conserved in a reliquary at Chambéry in France. The
Chambéry nuns later restored it by sewing some patches of cloth that have been removed in 2002. The
TS, after being displaced at Nizza in France and in other cities, like Vercelli, was taken in Turin in
1578.
Until the XIX century, scientific interest in the TS was limited, because of the scarcity of direct
analyses and the lack of photographs. Interest greatly developed after 1898, when S. Pia photographed
it and sent copies to the scientific world for independent studies, discovering that the body image is
like a photographic negative.
00001-p.2
WOPSAS 2015
In 1988, the TS was radiocarbon-dated to 1260-1390 A.D. [4], but the results are questionable [5,6].
As the process that formed the body image is still unknown, the dating method cannot be rigorously
applied because the environment in which the object under analysis was conserved must be known
from a contamination point of view. The imaging mechanism may in fact have varied the percentage
of carbon isotopes of the TS, thus producing a non-negligible systematic effect. In addition, the 1988
sample resulted not representative of the whole TS, because its chemical characteristics differ from
the main part [7].
Many hypotheses have been formulated [8] to explain the double body image that up to now is
impossible to be reproduced. The most reliable of them makes reference to a burst of energy coming
from the inner of the enveloped human body and, among the various energy source proposed, that
referring to a Corona Discharge [9] (connected with a very intense electric field) is able to explain a
greater number of the peculiar features detected on the TS.
2 Purposes of the Research Project
In order to try to find answers to the major problems related to the TS, or at least to improve the
knowledge about them, some Paduan researchers grouped in the University Research Project (URP)
entitled: “Multidisciplinary analysis applied to the Turin Shroud: study of the body image, of possible
ambient pollution and of micro-particles capable to characterize the linen fabric.” In particular, the
following questions have been posed by the Project:
-1. How did the body image formed?
-2. How much old is the linen fabric?
-3. Can we get some additional information from the TS particles?
-4. Can we get some additional information about the Man enveloped into the TS?
This section concerns an introduction to these arguments.
2.1 How did the body image formed?
The front and back images of the TS show an adult male, nude, well-proportioned and muscular, with
beard, moustache and long hair, and are compatible with a man 175 ± 2 cm tall enveloped in a sheet
[10] After stretching the sheet during the 2002 intervention, the Man resulted a bit taller, about 177 ±
2 cm; this fact implies that probably in the past, before other possible lengthening perhaps produced
during exhibitions, the body image originally corresponded to a man about 170 cm tall. The image has
many peculiar physical and chemical features, which cannot be reproduced all together [11]. Even if
some scholars [12] have attempted to reproduce the TS, their results are not able to replicate many
particular features [13], especially at microscopic level.
The linen sheet enveloped the corpse of a man who died on a cross [8,14,15]. The front and back
images visible on it are compatible with a man who was scourged, crowned with thorns, crucified and
who was stabbed in the right side with a lance after his death.
The most important and reliable scientific analysis on the TS was performed in 1978 by the STURP
(Shroud of TUrin Research Project) [14,16], a group of 52 American scientists who worked non-stop
on the cloth for 120 hours. They concluded that the body image on the TS cannot be scientifically
explained, and their only attempt at explanation consisted of stating that the image formed as if it were
caused by exposure to a short-lived but intense source of energy coming from the body wrapped in the
TS itself.
The cause of the yellowing of the body image in visible light is due to chemical alteration of the
polysaccharides contained in the linen fibers, consisting of chemical structures formed by dehydration,
oxidation and conjugation products in the linen itself. This chemistry is similar to the characteristics
of aging linen [16].
The front and back images are superficial [8,11] not only at thread level, but also at fiber level because
only the Primary Cell Wall is colored, while the inner cellulose is not. There are also uncolored fibers
00001-p.3
posed side by side with colored ones. The presence of an image on the back of the TS was recently
detected [17,18].
We know little if any about the process that generated the body image on the linen fabric of the TS.
Many scholars have proposed several different hypotheses to account for the formation of the image
[2,8], but their results appear inadequate. The most important hypotheses are the following.
- Gas diffusion. R. Rogers [19] made reference to the Maillard reaction as the cause of the body
image formation presuming the interaction of amines (generated by the human body during
decomposition) with a polysaccharide layer (the linen fabric was supposed to be formed by starch all
around the fibers) that produced the color of the external fibers of the TS.
- Contact hypothesis. J. Volkringer [20], studying imprints in old herbaria, caused by the pressure of
leaves, hypothesized that the TS image was produced by direct body/sheet contact, as a consequence
of a similar natural chemical reaction.
- Artistic copies. Many copies of the TS have been made by artists since the Middle Age, and many
of them were painted in contact with the original TS in order to make the copies second-order relics;
on these copies there is an explicit declaration that the artwork was copied from the original. At the
end of the 20th century instead various scholars [12,21-23] hypothesized the original TS as the result
of a Middle Age artist, but without furnishing a reliable explanation of how this artist was able to
obtain his result.
- Hypothesis of radiation. The majority of scientists have formulated different hypotheses of body
image formation based on “energy radiation” intended in a wide sense, as a process acting at a
distance. In fact there are some areas on the TS image, like those between the cheeks and nose, where
a body/cloth contact cannot be supposed. In addition this “energy radiation” was generated by the
enveloped human body because the most intense fabric coloration appears on the side where the cloth
touched the cadaver (the bloodstains features also confirm this).
It is interesting here to observe here that the “energy” must have been consisted as a short-lived burst
to explain the image of Fig. 1. In fact the bloodstains on the hair are coherent with a wrapping of the
TS around the face that produced a cylindrical distortion, while the body image (that formed later) is
coherent with a flatter position of the fabric enveloping the human body (with a radiation almost
vertical and no evident image distortion), probably due to a pressure increment of the air under the
sheet, connected with the burst of “energy”.
This result is the consequence of the fact that some bloodstains are very peculiar and can be explained
only with the hypothesis of a burst of “energy”. For example the bloodstain on the right hair at check
level, is not typical of hair wetted of blood (that would have produced a different stain, with much less
detailed edges), but are instead typical of a direct skin-fabric contact. If therefore the TS must have
touched a wound near the ear, and now we see this wound superimposed to the image of hair, we have
to suppose that the TS had two different wrapping configurations: a first one tight, during the
bloodstain formation coherent with a distortion of cylindrical type, and a second one with the TS
flatter due to the burst of energy.
Neither this, nor URP are the suitable places where to discuss how this “energy” was produced,
especially if we think that the Man in question was dead, but it is here of interest to try to find a
scientific explanation of what it has been detected from the direct studies on the body image features.
J. B. Rinaudo [24], hypothesized a proton radiation that produced the body image, coupled with a
neutron radiation (coming from the disintegration of deuterium atoms present in the human body), that
caused a rejuvenation of the carbon-14 age of the fabric; J. Jackson [25] assumed that a burst of
energy, prevalently of soft UV type, formed the TS image; a group of scientists led by G. Baldacchini
[26] proposed excimer lasers to partially verify the J. Jackson’s hypothesis.
The author and other researchers are convinced that the most probable hypothesis, also supported by
experimental results, is based on Corona Discharge [9,27]. Nevertheless, no complete results can be
obtained because of the difficult and, in some cases, dangerous environmental conditions (e.g. for the
MATEC Web of Conferences
00001-p.4
presence of radon) required for these experiments. For the time being, Corona Discharge may be
caused by various more or less identified sources such as (ball) lightning, earthquakes and radioactive
environments (radon), but perhaps the truth is beyond the Science. Imaging of the TS by a Corona
Discharge may even be a by-product of the Resurrection [9], and this may be why the image cannot be
technically reproduced or scientifically explained in a complete form. By means of the present URP
some progress about these hypotheses has nevertheless been obtained [28].
2.2 How much old is the linen fabric?
In 1988 the TS has been radiocarbon dated [4] to 1260-1390 A.D. at 95% confidence level with
evident statistical errors [6] that made this result doubtful. Perhaps the most evident demonstration
that these results are not coherent with the assigned uncertainty of ±65 years at 95% confidence level
is the following: the twelve published results are in a much wider range of 204 years (1155-1359
A.D.).
According to some scholars, it must also not be excluded the possibility that the sample of the TS used
for the 1988 test was not representative of the original [7,15] because picked up from a Medieval
mending.
Other studies evidenced problems with this result too [29,30], but the most important problem related
to this dating is a non-negligible spatial trend [2], that leads to think to an important contamination
perhaps due to environmental factors, not excluded that correlated to the energy perhaps produced
during the body image formation. In fact we must remember that the body image has not yet been
explained, and therefore the environment in which the TS was exposed in the past is not known.
In this view the development of alternative dating methods of the TS appear necessary; a numismatic
dating of the TS based on the concordance of the TS face with that of Christ minted in the Byzantine
coins [2, 31] has already cast doubts about the 1988 results, but the URP allowed the development of
new chemical and mechanical dating methods.
2.3 Can we get some additional information from the TS particles?
In various occasions, but principally in 1978 during STURP campaign [14,16], particles have been
picked up from the TS either using sticky tapes put in contact with the Relic or vacuuming the side of
the TS put in contacts with the reinforcing Holland Cloth by means of a special aspirator connected
with proper filters [32]. Some of those particles have been furnished to the coordinator of the URP
who used them for various kinds of analyses.
In particular clumps of these particles have been used to DNA tests in order to determine either which
kind of plants contaminated the linen fabric or which kind of persons polluted the Relic by touching or
kissing it.
Clumps of particles, having sizes of the order of 10 micrometers, coming from the vacuumed dusts
have been also mounted on proper stubs to perform SEM, ESEM and EDX analysis to verify the
presence of pollen grains, blood, spices, fungi and bacteria and hopefully to classify them in order to
confirm previous analyses [33,34,35,36,37,38,39] performed on different samples coming from the
TS.
2.4 Can we get some additional information about the Man enveloped into the TS?
It is scientifically demonstrated that the TS Man was enveloped in the TS as a corpse [40,41], but up
to now it is not yet clear which was the real cause of his death. Many researchers [42,43,44] proposed
different causes of death like hemothorax, hemopericardium, induced coagulopathy and asphyxia
basing their conclusion on almost subjective deductions but up to now no common agreement has
been found.
The URP was also addressed to perform a detailed study of all the characteristics of the corpse shown
on the TS in order to better evidence the real cause of death and other related aspects. For example the
WOPSAS 2015
00001-p.5
MATEC Web of Conferences
following question was posed: did the Man carried the cross or the patibulum? To reach this goal, a
group of physicians leaded by M. Bevilacqua formed to verify what is really visible on the TS body
image, also reinforcing their results by means of experimental tests, performed on parts of cadavers
furnished by the R. De Caro’s team of the Institute of Anatomy of the University of Padua.
3 Results of the Research Project
The present issue groups together the principal results obtained by the URP that have been exposed at
WOPSAS (WOrkshop of Paduan Scientific Analysis on the Shroud). In reference to the four questions
posed in Section 2, here are synthetically reported the following results.
3.1 The body image formation
It is well known that the body image formation process is not explainable in the whole and it was
probably a burst of “energy” (intended in a wide sense as a process acting at a distance) that formed
the image we see on the TS. In order to better understand the nature of this body image, some studies
have been performed to quantify its color range as a function of different anatomical parts and to show
the color differences among the other stains like blood and water.
The C. Privitera [45] of CRIS (Comitato di Ricerca Ingegneristica sulla Sindone - Committee for
Engineering Research on the Shroud, a new group composed of engineers who performed their degree
thesis and/or made some research on the TS at Padua University) made a colorimetric analysis of the
TS basing on previously acquired data by beans of certified instruments; he arrived to build a
quantitative photography of the TS useful to measure the tristimulus color levels in RGS and XYZCIE
color spaces. The innovation consists in the possibility of colorimetrically measuring the TS
through common tools.
A group of engineers leaded by G. Bedon [46] of CRIS also performed a chromatic analysis of the
bloodstains of the TS to characterize the various stains present on the TS.
The most probable source of energy is of electric type and connected to the Corona Discharge [9,27].
Some experiments have been performed to reproduce the TS body image and some interesting results
have been recently published [28]. F. Lattarulo presents in this issue, an electrostatic hypothesis that
could have produced the image.
3.2 Age of the linen fabric
Once ascertained that the 1988-radiocarbon result is not reliable, at least from a statistical point of
view [6,29,330], alternative dating methods are necessary to give information on the age of the TS
fabric. Two chemical methods based on FT-IR and Raman spectrometry have been proposed to date
the TS [51] and the results of these methods are here presented by P. Baraldi and A. Tinti in this issue.
The author with P. Malfi [48] proposed a multi-parametric mechanical method, using a special
machine built for the purpose and some preliminary results have been published in Ref. [49]. These
and other chemical results based on Raman and FT-IR spectrometry [47] are synthetized in this issue
also evidencing some dependences among the mechanical parameters considered.
With R. Basso, a Monte Carlo method has been applied in the present issue to the results deriving
from the mechanical dating in order to better evaluate the uncertainty propagation to the results
reported in Ref. [49]; a substantial confirmation of the previous results is there showed.
These alternative dating methods show that the age of the TS is compatible with the first Century
A.D., period in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine.

00001-p.6
3.3 Information from the TS particles
The URP addressed the study on the particles coming from the TS along two avenues. The first one
performed a microscopic recognition of the particles in question by using various kinds of tools like
optical microscope, SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) and ESEM (Environmental Scanning
Electron Microscope) with EDX (Energy Dispersive X-ray) [50].
In this way previous pollen analyses [33,34,39] recently put in discussion [40] have been instead
confirmed; the structure of the linen of TS fibers have been evidenced; particles of various kinds,
molds and mites have been classified thus helping in the understanding which environmental
conditions was subjected the Relic in the past centuries. I. Calliari with C. Canovaro presents these
results in the present issue.
The second one was addressed to the analysis of the DNA particles contained in the TS dusts [51]. In
particular the analysis of genomic DNA extracted from the dusts was used to study chloroplast DNA
and to define several plant taxa. Many of them resulted native to the Mediterranean area as well as
species with a primary center of origin in Asia, the Middle East or the Americas.
Human mitochondrial DNA was also extracted from the TS dusts, with detection of sequences from
multiple subjects, which clustered into a number of Western Eurasian haplogroups, including some
known to be typical of Western Europe (H1 and H3), the Near East (H13 and H33), the Arabian
Peninsula (R0a) and the Indian sub-continent (M39, M56 and R8).
These findings are therefore in agreement with the hypothesis of contact with individuals of different
ethnic origins, compatible with the historic path followed by the Relic during its journey from the
Near East. This study also evidenced the possibility of an Indian manufacture of the linen cloth and
these findings are reported in a paper of this issue written by G. Barcaccia et al.
3.4 Information about the Man enveloped into the TS
The analysis of the TS image from a medical point of view evidenced [52] that the injuries visible on
the TS body image are in agreement with the Man suffering a violent blunt trauma to the neck, chest
and shoulder from behind, causing lesions of the entire brachial plexus during the cross transportation.
The blunt chest trauma, which resulted in the body falling forwards, was the direct cause of a lung
contusion and haemothorax (confirmed by the post-mortem leakage of clots and serum from the chest)
and was a likely cause of cardiac contusion.
The wrists were probably nailed in the Destot space with ulnar artery cutting and partial tear of the
ulnar nerve that caused thumb retraction. The right foot was probably dislocated to the ankle. The
likely cause of immediate death was a myocardial infarction with hearth rupture, haemopericardium
and tamponade of a subject with cardiac contusion [53]. M. Bevilacqua et al. described in details the
status of the TS Man in the present issue.
4 Conclusion
This paper presents the main results of the scientific research performed on the Turin Shroud by
the URP. The following questions have been posed by the Project:
-1. How did the body image formed?
-2. How much old is the linen fabric?
-3. Can we get some additional information from the TS particles?
-4. Can we get some additional information about the Man enveloped into the TS?
The answers are synthetically reported in this collection of papers. In reference to Point 1,
ascertained that the body image formation process is not explainable in the whole, it is discussed why
this process was probably due to a source of “energy”; the most probable one is of electric type and
connected to the Corona Discharge [9,27,28].
In reference to Point 2, ascertained that the 1988-radiocarbon result is not reliable [5,6,7], at least
from a statistical point of view, alternative dating methods of chemical and mechanical types have
WOPSAS 2015
00001-p.7
MATEC Web of Conferences
been developed [2,47,48,49] showing that the age of the TS is compatible with the first Century A.D.,
period in which Jesus Christ lived in Palestine.
In reference to Point 3, two ways have been followed. The first one performed a microscopic
recognition of the dust particles both confirming pollen analyses [33,34,39] recently put in discussion
[40] and classifying other particles of various kinds. The second one was addressed to the analysis of
the DNA particles [51] through the extraction of both chloroplast DNA to define several plant taxa
and human mitochondrial DNA to detect the different haplogroups of persons who entered in contact
with the Relic.
In reference to Point 4, the Man suffered a violent blunt trauma to the neck, chest and shoulder
from behind, causing lesions of the entire brachial plexus. The trauma was produced by the TS Man
falling forwards, during the cross transportation. The likely cause of immediate death was a
myocardial infarction with rupture, haemopericardium and heart tamponade [52,53].
All the evidence is in favor of the hypothesis that the TS Man is Jesus of Nazareth.
Acknowledgements
This work has been done with the support of the University Research Project - Padova, Italy 2009
#CPDA099244 entitled "Multidisciplinary Analysis Applied to the Shroud of Turin: a study of body
image, of possible environmental pollution and of microparticles characterizing the linen fabric."
The Author thanks the Rector of Padua University, prof. Giuseppe Zaccaria, both for having allowed
the organization the WOPSAS meeting and for having promoted, also with a grant (Decr. Rep.
n.2463/2015, Prot. 214307), the publications of this collection of papers.
References
1. G. Fanti, R. Basso, “The Turin Shroud, Optical Research in the Past Present and Future”, Publisher
Nova Science Pub Inc., USA, March 2008.
2. G. Fanti, P. Malfi, “The Shroud of Turin – First century After Christ!”, Pan Stanford Publishing
Pte. Ltd., Singapore, 2015.
3. I. Wilson, V. Miller, “The Mysterious Shroud“, Doubleday Image Book, USA, 1986.
4. P.E. Damon, Donahue D.J., Gore B.H., Hatheway A.L., Jull A.J.T., Linick T.W., Sercel P.J., Toolin
L.J., Bronk C.R., Hall E.T., Hedges R.E.M., Housley R., Law I.A., Perry C., Bonani G., Trumbore
S., Wölfli W., Ambers J.C., Bowman S.G.E., Leese M.N., Tite M.S., “Radiocarbon dating of the
Shroud of Turin”, Nature, Vol. 337, February 16, 1989, pp. 611-615.
5. B. J. Walsh, “The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered”, Shroud of Turin Center,
Richmond, Virginia USA, 1999, pp. 326-342.
6. M. Riani, A. C. Atkinson, G. Fanti, F. Crosilla: “Regression analysis with partially labelled
regressors: carbon dating of the Shroud of Turin” Journal of Statistical Computing. Stat. Comput.
(2012).
7. R. Rogers, “Studies on the radiocarbon sample from the Shroud of Turin”, Thermochemical Acta,
Vol. 425, Issues 1-2 , 20, Jan. 2005, pp. 189-194.
8 G. Fanti, “Hypotheses regarding the formation of the body image on the Turin Shroud. A critical
compendium”, J. of Imaging Sci. Technol., Vol. 55, No.6, p. 060507 (2011).
9. G. Fanti, “Can Corona Discharge explain the body image formation of the Turin Shroud?”, J. of
Imaging Science and Technology, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 020508-1/10 (2010).
10. G. Fanti, R. Basso, G. Bianchini, “Turin Shroud: Compatibility Between a Digitized Body Image
and a Computerized Anthropomorphous Manikin”, J. of Imaging Sci. Technol., 54 No.5, p.
050503-1/8, (2010).
11. G. Fanti, J.A. Botella, P. Di Lazzaro, T. Heimburger, R. Schneider, N. Svensson,” Microscopic
and Macroscopic Characteristics of the Shroud of Turin Image Superficiality”, J. of Imaging Sci.
Technol., 54 No. 4, p. 040201-1/8, (2010).
00001-p.8
12. L. Garlaschelli, Life-size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and its Image, J. of Imaging
Science and Technology 54(4): 040301-1/040301-14 (2010).
13. G. Fanti, T. Heimburger, “Letter to the Editor: Comments on - Life-Size Reproduction of the
Shroud of Turin and Its Image” by L. Garlaschelli- “J. Imaging Sci. Technol. Vol. 55, 020102
(Feb. 25, 2011).
14. E.J. Jumper, Adler A.D., Jackson J.P., Pellicori S.F., Heller J.H., Druzik J.R., “A comprehensive
examination of the various stains and images on the Shroud of Turin”, Archaeological Chemistry
III, ACS Advances in Chemistry nº 205, J.B. Lambert, Editor, Chapter 22, American Chemical
Society, Washington D.C., 1984, pp. 447-476.
15. A. D. Adler, “Updating recent studies on the Shroud of Turin”, American Chemical Society,
Symposium Series No. 625, Archaeological Chemistry 625, 223-228, (1996).
16. L. A. Schwalbe, R.N. Rogers, “Physics and chemistry of the Shroud of Turin, a summary of the
1978 investigation”, Analytical Chemical Acta, Vol. 135, pp. 3-49, (1982).).
17. Fanti, R. Maggiolo, "The double superficiality of the frontal image of the Turin Shroud", J. of
Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics, volume 6, issue 6, 2004, pages 491- 503.
18. G. Fanti, R. Maggiolo, “About the second image of face detected on the Turin Shroud”, Int.
Conference on the “Shroud of Turin: The Controversial Intersection of Faith and Science”, St.
Louis, Missouri (2014), http://www.shroud.com/pdfs/stlfanti1.pdf
19. R. Rogers, A Chemist’s perspective on the Shroud of Turin, Lulu.com (2008).
20. J. Volckringer, The Holy Shroud: science confronts the imprints, The Runciman Press, Manly,
Australia (1991) p.10.
21. E. A. Craig, R. R. Bresee, Image Formation and the Shroud of Turin, Journal of Imaging Science
and Technology, 34(1), pp. 59-67, (1994).
22. V. Pesce Delfino, E l'uomo creò la Sindone, Ed. Dedalo, Bari (2000) p.49.
23. J. Nickell, Inquest on the shroud of Turin, Prometheus Books, Buffalo New York (1998) p.101.
24. B. Rinaudo, Image formation on the Shroud of Turin explained by a protonic model affecting
radiocarbon dating, III Congr. Int. di Studi sulla Sindone, Turin, Italy (1998) Proc. on CD pp. 474-
483.
25. J. P. Jackson, “Does the Shroud of Turin show us the Resurrection?” Biblia y Fé, (1998).
26. G. Baldacchini, P. Di Lazzaro, D. Murra, G. Fanti: “Coloring Linens by Excimer Lasers to
Explain the Body Image of the Turin Shroud” Applied Optics Vol. 47, No. 9, 20, pp. 1278-1285
(2008).
27. G. Fanti, F. Lattarulo, O. Scheuermann: “Body Image Formation Hypotheses Based on Corona
Discharge”, Third Dallas Int. Conf. on the Shroud of Turir, Texas (2005),
http://www.dim.unipd.it/fanti/corona.pdf
28. G. Fanti, F. Lattarulo, G. Pesavento, “Experimental Results Using Corona Discharge to Attempt to
Reproduce the Turin Shroud Image”, ATSI 2014, WOPSAS, Bari, Italy (2014), http://www.shsconferences.org/articles/ ... _00003.pdf

29. R. Van Haelst “Radiocarbon dating the Shroud of Turin - A critical statistical analysis…”, (1997),
http://www.shroud.com/vanhels3.htm
30. B. J Walsh, “The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered”, 1999 Richmond Conf.
on the Turin Shroud, (1999)
http://web.archive.org/web/200404220101 ... rbon-a.htm
31. M. & A.Whanger, "The Shroud of Turin, An Adventure of Discovery," Providence House
Publishers, Franklin, TN (1998), p.33.
32. G. Fanti, R. Basso, ”Statistical Analysis Of Dusts Taken From Different Areas Of The Turin
Shroud”, Int. Conf. The Shroud Of Turin: Perspectives on A Multifaceted Enigma, Ohio State
University, (2008), Libreria Progetto, Padova, Italy (2009),
http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p16.pdf
33. M. Frei, “Il passato della Sindone alla luce della palinologia”, in: “La Sindone e la Scienza”, II
Congr. Int. di Sindonologia, Torino, Ed. Paoline, Torino Italy (1979), pp. 191-200.
34. M. Frei “Identificazione e classificazione dei nuovi pollini della Sindone”, in: “La Sindone,
Scienza e Fede”, II Convegno Naz. di Sindonologia, CLUEB, Bologna, Italy (1983), pp. 277-284.
WOPSAS 2015
00001-p.9
MATEC Web of Conferences
35. A. Danin , A.D. Whanger, U. Baruch, M. Whanger, “Flora of the Shroud of Turin”, Missouri
Botanical Garden Press, USA (1999), pp. 1-52.
36. G. Ciccone, “La truffa dei pollini. Il dossier completo”, http://sindone.weebly.com/pollini1.html
(2011).
37. J. A. Kohlbeck, E.L. Nitowski, “New evidence may explain image on Shroud of Turin”, Biblical
Archaeology Review, vol. 12, n. 4 (1986), pp.23-24.
38. P.L. Baima Bollone, “La presenza della mirra, dell'aloe e del sangue sulla Sindone”, II Convegno
Naz. di Sindonologia, CLUEB, Bologna. Italy (1983), pp. 169-174.
39. S. Scannerini, “Mirra, aloe, pollini e altre tracce, ricerca botanica sulla Sindone”, Elle Di Ci
Torino, Italy (1997).
40. Faccini B., Carreira E., Fanti G., De Palacios J., Villalain J., “The Death Of The Shroud Man: An
Improved Review”, Proc. Int. Conf.: The Shroud Of Turin: Perspectives on A Multifaceted
Enigma, Ohio USA (2008), Libreria Progetto, Padova, Italy (2009),
http://www.ohioshroudconference.com/papers/p07.pdf
41. P. Barbet, “The Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ”, Clonmore & Reynolds Ltd, Dublin (1954).
42. P. Barbet, “A Doctor at Calvary - The Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ as Described By a
Surgeon”; Roman Catholic Books: Fort Collins (1993).
43. R. Bucklin, R. The Legal and Medical Aspects of the Trial and Death of Christ. Science and the
Law, 10, 14-26, (1970).
44. F. T. Zugibe, “The Crucifixion of Jesus: A Forensic Inquiry”, 1st ed.; M. Evans and Company:
New York (2005).
45. G. Fanti, C. Privitera, “A Quantitative Image of the Turin Shroud for Details Recognition”, Proc.
Int. Workshop on the Scientific Approach to the Acheiropoietos Images, ENEA Research Center
of Frascati, Italy (2010).
46. G. Bedon, M. Linguanotto, L. Simonato, F. Zara, “Study of the bloodstains in the Shroud of Turin.
International Congress “, Int. Conf. The Shroud Of Turin: Perspectives on A Multifaceted Enigma,
Ohio State University, (2008), Libreria Progetto, Padova, Italy (2009).
47. G. Fanti, P. Baraldi, , R. Basso, A. Tinti, Non-destructive dating of ancient flax textiles by means
of vibrational spectroscopy, Vibrational Spectroscopy, Volume 67, P. 61–70 (2013).
48. G. Fanti, P. Malfi, “Multi-parametric micro-mechanical dating of single fibers coming from
ancient flax textiles”, Textile Research Journal (2013), SAGE Pub., Volume 84 Issue.
49. G. Fanti, P. Malfi, “A New Cyclic-Loads Machine For The Measurement Of Micro-Mechanical
Properties Of Single Flax Fibers Coming From The Turin Shroud”, AIMETA Congress, Turin,
Italy (2013) http://shroudofturin.files.wordpress.co ... -fanti.pdf
50. G. Fanti, I. Calliari, C. Canovaro “Analysis of micro-particles vacuumed from the Turin
Shroud”, "Communication at I Int. Congr. on the Holy Shroud in Spain", Valencia, Spain (2012).
51. G. Barcaccia, G. Galla, A. Achilli, A. Olivieri, A. Torroni, “Uncovering the sources of DNA
found on the Turin Shroud”, accepted to Nature.
52. M. Bevilacqua, G. Fanti, M. D’Arienzo, R. De Caro, “Do we really need new medical information
about the Turin Shroud?” Injury, (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2013.09.013 (accessed
August 2015).
53. M. Bevilacqua, G. Fanti, M. D’Arienzo, A. Porzionato, V. Macchi, R. De Caro, “How was the
Turin Shroud Man crucified?”, Injury Vol. 45 Supp. 6 P. S142-S148 (2014),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.039.

The key source, it seems to me, is this one, which Fanti uses to discount the 1988 study results.

B. J. Walsh, “The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered”, Shroud of Turin Center,
Richmond, Virginia USA, 1999, pp. 326-342.

[Hindsite]

Fanti supposedly got his results from the same sample used by the Oxford and Zurich studies, so how he arrived at "300 BC to 400 AD" when all three other studies arrived at a consensus of 1200-1350 is beyond me.

The new dating I referenced by non-destructive methods was actually of the Shroud and not the repaired and dyed edge, which was cut in several small parts to use as samples to date. Apparently you really don't want to know the truth, because you refuse to look at the video or read my references. I could reference many more articles and videos on this subject, but if you don't want to know the truth, I see mo point in debating you further. I know the truth and you don't because I have been following this for a long time and have seen almost everything on it.

[MB.]

Hindsite, you clearly have a stake in this since you believe apriori that the shroud is legit. I have no stake in this, but as a skeptic my default position is that its probably a medieval forgery (which makes the most sense from a rational perspective, and appears to be supported by the hard science evidence).

You're bending over backwards, just like Fanti, to prove the 1988 results were bogus so that you can then justify renewed study which, you hope, will produce the results you want. This is what lead Fanti et all to the neutron bombardment theory.

Please do continue to post more evidence here. I am of course interested in this subject and am using the resources I have available to investigate myself, but I do appreciate your assistance considering your greater familiarity with this topic.

However, according to the article I posted above, there is actaully no evidence that the samples used in 1988 were not perfectly legit. The claims that the samples were from a repaired section or whatever appear to be bogus, see here:

Another argument has been made (G. Hoyas, pers commun May 2, 1989) that the part of the shroud from which the sample wascut had possibly become worn and threadbare from countless handlings and had been
subjected to medieval textile restoration. If so, the restoration would have had to be done
with such incredible virtuosity as to render it microscopically indistinguishable from the real
thing. Even modern so-called invisible weaving can readily be detected under a microscope,
so this possibility seems unlikely. It seems very convincing that what was measured in the
laboratories was genuine cloth from the shroud after it had been subjected to rigorous cleaning procedures.

Fanti cites THIS article, over and over again, as his source for doubting the legitimacy of the 1988 study.

B.J. Walsh
The 1988 Shroud of Turin Radiocarbon Tests Reconsidered
Shroud of Turin Center, Richmond, Virginia USA (1999), pp. 326-342

http://web.archive.org/web/200404220101 ... rbon-a.htm

This is NOT a peer reviewed publication and its just some guy at the "Shroud of Turin Centre" in the USA. By any chance, are you from Richmond, Virginia, or associated with this group?

[Hindsite]

Hindsite, you clearly have a stake in this since you believe apriori that the shroud is legit. I have no stake in this, but as a skeptic my default position is that its probably a medieval forgery (which makes the most sense from a rational perspective, and appears to be supported by the hard science evidence).

No, I did not believe apriori that the shroud is legit. In fact, I believed as you did and told others that it was probably a fake. But after considering the evidence from all sources I became a believer.

You're bending over backwards, just like Fanti, to prove the 1988 results were bogus so that you can then justify renewed study which, you hope, will produce the results you want. This is what lead Fanti et all to the neutron bombardment theory.

I am not bending over backward to prove anything about the Shroud, that has already been done. I am not into theories, such as the theory of evolution, I look for facts, not stories.

Please do continue to post more evidence here. I am of course interested in this subject and am using the resources I have available to investigate myself, but I do appreciate your assistance considering your greater familiarity with this topic.

However, according to the article I posted above, there is actaully no evidence that the samples used in 1988 were not perfectly legit. The claims that the samples were from a repaired section or whatever appear to be bogus, see here:

I can tell that you still haven't watched the video all the way through.

[MB.]

I have watched the video through, and the points therein were addressed by Gove in the article I posted:

In
addition to this charge by the unnamed French monk, serious questions have been raised by
R Halisey (pers commun Aug 14,1989) as to why the sampling of the shroud and the sealing
of the samples took place in two separate locations since that opens the possibility that a
substitution could have been made of the shroud samples. This sample sealing procedure was apparently not videotaped although all the other operations were (Damon et al 1989).
Despite this inexplicable contretemps, it seems probable that the Archbishop would detect
such a substitution except in the unlikely event the British Museum official was inclined to
perpetrate such a fraud and was capable of the requisite legerdemain. Equally unlikely but at
least more plausible would be the substitution of snippets of first century cloth for the
shroud samples. In any case, the distinctive 3 to 1 herringbone twill weave of the shroud
could not be matched as the British Museum officials discovered when they attempted to
find such for control samples. It was actually fortunate that the shroud samples were, in fact,
identifiable both to preclude the possibility of substitution and for other reasons discussed
below.
Along these same lines is the claim that the 10mm x 70mm strip, cut from the edge of
the shroud just above the place where a sample had been removed in 1973, contained
stitching threads or possibly pieces of the backing cloth of much later than first century
vintage. Not only would this have been spotted by the two textile experts present but
subsequent examination by members of the dating laboratories would have instantly
revealed such extraneous material. All the laboratories examined the textile samples
microscopically and removed any foreign material.

[Hindsite]

I have watched the video through, and the points therein were addressed by Gove in the article I posted:

Obviously, they don't want to admit they screwed up. I would not expect anything else from dishonest people.

HalleluYah
Praise the Lord

[ingliz]

One's genitals are not unclean.

Jewish law "definitely prohibits touching one’s own genitals – the unmarried man never, and the married man only in connection with urination."


Epstein, L.M. (1967) Sex laws and customs in Judaism p. 137

[Hindsite]

Jewish law "definitely prohibits touching one’s own genitals – the unmarried man never, and the married man only in connection with urination."


Epstein, L.M. (1967) Sex laws and customs in Judaism p. 137

But Christians don't believe that because it is stupid. The Talmud contains traditions, laws, and interpretations that were added by the Jewish rabbis. Jesus spoke against some of those interpretations and called them the "traditions of men". (Mark 7:8)

http://www.fogwhistle.ca/acts/evidence.html

[ingliz]

But Christians don't believe that

Make up your mind. It is only a few posts ago you insisted that Jesus was prepared for burial according to the Jewish rite.

That might also be a sign of Jewish burial practices.

And you were right, he should have been. And right is right, even if it does put the kibosh to your argument.

Jesus was for all intents a Jew; Christianity is down to Paul.

[Hindsite]

Make up your mind. It is only a few posts ago you insisted that Jesus was prepared for burial according to the Jewish rite.

No, I never said that. I went back and looked and here is what I said in reply to starman2003.

starman2003 wrote:
And the fingers just happened to cover the private parts? That's a clear sign of an artistic work not a forensic thing.

Hindsite wrote:
That might also be a sign of Jewish burial practices.

Notice I said "might" because I did not know for sure. But it seemed reasonable that even they would cover the nakedness of one of their own from what I read in the Old Testament. For example, Noah.

And you were right, he should have been. And right is right, even if it does put the kibosh to your argument.

Jesus was for all intents a Jew.

I never said Jesus was not a Jew. All I said was that Jesus disagreed with the Jews and they had Him crucified because of it. The Jews were never going to give Jesus a proper Jewish burial according to their traditions. Judas was the only Jew among the original 12 disciples and he betrayed Jesus for money from the Jewish leadership. All the other disciples were from the other 11 tribes of Jacob (Israel).

[ingliz]

I never said Jesus was not a Jew.

The Synoptic Gospel narratives describe Jesus, not as a law breaking Jew, but as an observant Jew who conformed to the accepted religious practices of his tradition; an observant and devout Jew who did not violate the purity laws of his time.

E.P. Sanders (1985) Jesus and Judaism

The Jews were never going to give Jesus a proper Jewish burial according to their traditions.

The Jews never refused to bury any executed criminal, but instead of allowing the bodies of such sinners to be placed in family tombs, where they might desecrate those already buried, they provided a burial site for criminals just outside the city (Josephus, Antiquities v. 44).

All the other disciples were from the other 11 tribes of Jacob (Israel)

Around 1000 BC, David united the 12 tribes into a single religious state; Jesus' disciples were as Jewish as Jesus was.

[Hindsite]

The Synoptic Gospel narratives describe Jesus, not as a law breaking Jew, but as an observant Jew who conformed to the accepted religious practices of his tradition; an observant and devout Jew who did not violate the purity laws of his time.

E.P. Sanders (1985) Jesus and Judaism

The High Priest and the accusers of Jesus did not see Him as an observant Jew. Jesus and His disciples were accused of disobeying the Sabbath, eating with unclean hands, and many other things.

The Jews never refused to bury any executed criminal, but instead of allowing the bodies of such sinners to be placed in family tombs, where they might desecrate those already buried, they provided a burial site for criminals just outside the city (Josephus, Antiquities v. 44).

The High Priest convicted Jesus of blasphemy and not just of being a common criminal. Pilate was unable to find any criminal charge against Him. Even if the Jews had intended to bury him with criminals that would have been at least 36 hours later. God had other ideas for His Son which Isaiah predicts:

They intended to bury him with criminals, but he ended up in a rich man’s tomb,
because he had committed no violent deeds, nor had he spoken deceitfully.
(Isaiah 53:9 NET Bible)

Around 1000 BC, David united the 12 tribes into a single religious state; Jesus' disciples were as Jewish as Jesus was.

This was about 1000 years after the time of David and they were not united anymore. This can be seen from Kings and Chronicles in the Old Testament. We can also tell from the New Testament that they were divided.

Anyway, it is apparent that God meant His Son to be buried as He was and that the burial Shroud and face cloth would be preserved as a testimony to us in these last days.

HalleluYah
Praise the Lord

[ingliz]

disobeying the Sabbath

Scripture records that Jesus' disciples were walk­ing through a field on the Sabbath when they plucked and ate heads of grain. (Luke 6:2)

eating with unclean hands

An examination of the passages in Mark 7:1-5 and Matthew 15:1-2 reveal that it was Jesus' disciples, not Jesus himself, who were being accused of not washing their hands before eating. Also, although it appears in the Mishnah, it is not a biblical requirement and prior to 70 CE, ordinary Jews did not accept the practice.

God had other ideas for His Son

Why not admit you were wrong on this point as you are wrong on so many points.

Anyway, it is apparent that God meant His Son to be buried as He was...

Hand-waving again.

[Hindsite]

Scripture records that Jesus' disciples were walk­ing through a field on the Sabbath when they plucked and ate heads of grain. (Luke 6:2)

An examination of the passages in Mark 7:1-5 and Matthew 15:1-2 reveal that it was Jesus' disciples, not Jesus himself, who were being accused of not washing their hands before eating. Also, although it appears in the Mishnah, it is not a biblical requirement and prior to 70 CE, ordinary Jews did not accept the practice.

Why not admit you were wrong on this point as you are wrong on so many points.

Hand-waving again.

Whether, I am right or wrong on this practice is a minor point and it doesn't matter what the customs of the Jews were, because as it turned out, the Jews did not bury Jesus, His disciples that were not Jews buried Jesus. And as the gospels point out, they did not always follow Jewish traditions anyway. So the fact that His disciples placed His hands over His private parts, does not prove the Shroud a fraud. Maybe, it proves it is genuine.

It is clear from the gospels that the Jews were enemies of Jesus and He was a Jew and after His crucifixion the disciples were afraid of the Jews, until Jesus rose from the dead.

[ingliz]

the Jews did not bury Jesus

Wrong.

Joseph of Arimathea buried Jesus.

"Likewise Joseph also came forth and said unto them: Why is it that ye are vexed against me, for that I begged the body of Jesus? behold I have laid it in my new tomb, having wrapped it in clean linen, and I rolled a stone over the door of the cave."

— The Gospel of Nicodemus formerly known as the Acts of Pontius Pilate

Joseph was a Jew.

His disciples that were not Jews buried Jesus.

Wrong.

See above.

All the other disciples were from the other 11 tribes of Jacob (Israel)... His disciples that were not Jews buried Jesus.

"were not Jews" is wrong.

*** Note the emphases ***

The prophet Jeremiah on God's New Covenant with the Jews:

"This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the Lord.

— Jeremiah 31:33

The apostle Paul on Jews.

Jews:

For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel.

— Romans 9:3-4

Himself as a Jew:

circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews

— Philippians 3:5

Matthew on Jews:

these twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel."

— Matthew 10:5-6

The movement for the first hundred years should be seen as part of Judaism (Matt. 10:5-6).

The Judaeo-Christians considered themselves Jews and their outward behaviour and dietary customs were Jewish. In fact, they faithfully observed all the rules and regulations of the Mosaic Law. In particular, the apostles and their followers continued to frequent the religious centre of Judaism, the Temple of Jerusalem, for private and public worship, and it was there that they performed charismatic healings (Acts 3:1-10; 5:12, 20, 25, 42). According to the Acts, the entire Jesus party assembled for prayer in the sanctuary every day (Acts 2:46). Even Paul, the chief opponent of the obligatory performance of Jewish customs in his churches, turned out to be a temple-goer on his occasional visits to Jerusalem. He once fell into a trance in the course of his prayer in the House of God (Acts 22:17) and on a later occasion he underwent the prescribed purification rituals before commissioning the priests to offer sacrifice on his behalf (Acts 21:24-6).

[...]

The switch in the perception of Jesus from charismatic prophet to superhuman being coincided with a geographical and religious change, when the Christian preaching of the Gospel moved from the Galilean-Judaean Jewish culture to the pagan surroundings of the Graeco-Roman world.

[Hindsite]

Wrong.

Joseph of Arimathea buried Jesus.
Joseph was a Jew.

You may be right for here is what the Gospel of John says:

Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jewish leaders. With Pilate’s permission, he came and took the body away. He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds. Taking Jesus’ body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there.
(John 19:38-42 NIV)

Nicodemus was probably a Jew too. But here it says they wrapped Jesus in linen with spices in accordance with Jewish Burial practices of that time. I did not remember this, but it looks like my first speculation was correct. But I still object to your idea that the hands would not cover the genitals, because they were unclean. Actually, a dead body is considered unclean, but they are still allowed to prepare them for burial. In the case of Jesus, it had to be done hurriedly before the Sabbath arrived at sunset. If they would have had more time, they might have dressed Jesus and then there would be no need to place the hands over His genitals to avoid seeing his nakedness, as in the story of Noah's sons. (Genesis 9:20-23)

The prophet Jeremiah on God's New Covenant with the Jews:

"This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel after that time," declares the Lord.

— Jeremiah 31:33

The apostle Paul on Jews.

Jews:

For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my people, those of my own race, the people of Israel.

— Romans 9:3-4

Himself as a Jew:

circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews

— Philippians 3:5

Matthew on Jews:

these twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel."

— Matthew 10:5-6

The movement for the first hundred years should be seen as part of Judaism (Matt. 10:5-6).

The Tribe of Benjamin is not a Jew, but they are Isrealites. Jews only come from the tribe of Judah, which are also israelites. So all israelites are not Jews as you seem to think. The Israelites consisted of all the Tribes of Jacob, whose name was changed to Israel.

But none of this has any meaning when it come to the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin.

[ingliz]

The Tribe of Benjamin is not a Jew

Mordecai is referred to as both a Jew and a member of the tribe of Benjamin.

Now there was in the citadel of Susa a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin, named Mordecai son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish

Esther 2:5

[Hindsite]

Mordecai is referred to as both a Jew and a member of the tribe of Benjamin.

Now there was in the citadel of Susa a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin, named Mordecai son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish

Esther 2:5

Yeah, I had forgot about that at one time Israel was divided into two kingdoms. The Kingdom of Judah was the nation formed from the territories of the tribes of Judah, Simon, and Benjamin after the United Kingdom of Israel was divided. It was named after Judah, son of Jacob.

So technically anyone from the Kingdom of Judah could be called a Jew. So I stand corrected on that point as well. If you keep this up you may become a knowledgeable Bible Scholar. However, I think I have forgotten more than you will ever know. Praise the Lord (HalleluYah).

[Potemkin]

However, I think I have forgotten more than you will ever know.

That's not the impression I'm getting, Hindsite.