Shroud of Turin

When it comes down to it, no researcher has ever directly identified the image as originating from blood.Walter McCrone, an expert in microanalysis, painting authentication and former member of STURP, opposes the authenticity of the Shroud of Turin based upon his objective application of true science. McCrone found that the image on the Shroud consisted of the paint pigments red ochre and vermillion in a collagen tempera medium, both of which were in common use in the thirteenth century and explained the presence of iron and protein. Through the use of x-ray diffraction, scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive x-ray, mercury and sulfur were also detected which had previously been left out by other pro-authenticity researchers due to their ability to explain their presence. However, both substances were found in the pigments of the Middle Ages. Furthermore, McCrone identified the painting style as grisaille, which was common in the Middle Ages, and was able to recreate an image similar to the Shroud of Turin upon a linen cloth.

My personal opinion, based on my photographic experience and my close examination of the Shroud itself, is that the weave of the cloth is far too coarse to resolve the rather subtle and very tiny inscription on a dime sized ancient coin...What he (Filas) saw as inscriptions, I saw as random shapes and noise. Such is the subjective nature of image analysis. For these reasons however, I cannot accept these coin "inscriptions" as viable evidence of a first century Shroud "date"...I do not argue that there appears to be something on the eyes of the man of the Shroud, and it may well be coins or potshards, since they were used in some first century burial rituals, but I do not believe we can resolve coin inscriptions.