Need to get your facts straight. The C-14 test in 1988 showed that the shroud was only 728 years old, and it was declared a fraud. Most people lost interest after that, despite the fact that the other features of the cloth could not be explained. As I noted in another post, the original C-14 test is under heavy doubt, and they are hoping to get permission to do another one.
I rather disagree that you could find so many mysteries in any piece of cloth you look closely enough at. Textiles from every culture are analyzed by scientists all the time. How many pieces of cloth do you know that have the negative, three dimensional image of a crucified man! Unfortunately, there are more myths about the shroud than there are facts. Take the time to research the facts with an open mind, and you cannot help but be impressed. How passionately people want to disprove it! Maybe it threatens their reality. It can never be proven to be Christ. But it has proven to be a mystery. Paul
> Actually, you could find the same sort of 'irresolvables' in
> anything that people were motivated enough to investigate so
> thoroughly. I think the reason that the Shroud generates so
> many paradoxes is that people are so intensely interested in
> it and will go to the limits of knowledge trying to prove or
> disprove that it is genuine.
> Look at the carbon dating tests. They took a few threads from
> it and dated them to exactly the century when the Shroud is
> first historically documented. With any other piece of cloth
> that would be it. But people who desperately wanted it to be
> genuine went the extra mile and figured out how it could have
> accidently picked up some extra carbon-14 during a fire. Now
> there is research going on about the effects of smoke on
> Carbon-14 content. Would anyone bother with this if the
> authenticity of the Shroud of Turin weren't involved?
> So rather than being something special about the Shroud
> itself it's simply the quixotic nature of human knowledge
> that is being demonstrated. And I think that is what the
> 'trickster' archetype is really about. The Shroud is just the
> accidental focal point.