The image is pixelated, meaning that it’s made up of thousands of tiny dots. Each dot only penetrates partway into the topmost fibrils of the outer threads, each of which is about 1/10 the width of a human hair. According to the STURP report, “No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils. X-ray, fluorescence and microchemistry on the fibrils preclude the possibility of paint being used as a method for creating the image.” The dots appear to be the result of “oxidation, dehydration and conjugation”, which suggests that they were produced by radiation.

In 1988, a sample from the Shroud was carbon-dated to between 1260 and 1390 AD. To many, this was enough to write off the Shroud as a forgery, but new information that arose since those tests has cast substantial doubt on their veracity. In particular, a type of “bioplastic coating” (a kind of living varnish made of microorganisms) that can radically alter carbon-dating results was found on the Shroud by Dr. Leoncio Garza-Valdes. Hopefully, the Catholic Church will allow it to be tested again with better techniques, but in light of the discovery of this bioplastic coating, the dating should be categorized as inconclusive until such time as new tests can be performed.

There are dozens of pieces of art and coins from the first millennium after Christ that appear to be copied from the Shroud image. There have also been particular types of limestone dust and pollen grains removed from the Shroud that could only have come from in or around Jerusalem. There is another artifact called “The Soudarion of Oviedo” located in Spain, which appears to be the head cloth of Jesus referenced in the gospels, and which is provenanced back to at least the 7th century AD. This artifact has bloodstains that match those of the Shroud precisely when they are overlaid with one another.

When viewed with a complex device known as the VP-8 Image Analyzer, the image on the Shroud appears topographically 3-dimensional, strongly suggesting that the image was projected by a body while the cloth was draped over it. There is no known forgery that has this feature, which would be amazing for a forger to even imagine, much less engineer. In addition, the blood stains have been positively identified as human blood exudates (type AB), and the flow patterns exactly match what would be expected in a crucifixion. There are pierce wounds in both feet and wrists, puncture wounds around the head, approximately 120 dumbbell-shaped contusions (matching the Roman flagrum) and many other injuries.

Much has been made of certain skeptical speculations on the Shroud made by a gentleman named Walter McCrone in the late 1970’s. McCrone claimed that he had found paint particles on the Shroud, and that the image was therefore a painting. Many skeptics followed suit with similar claims, but the fact is that close analysis of the threads show that there is no correlation between the image and any paint particles. Moreover, there are 52 historically documented cases of artists “sanctifying” their paintings over the years by placing them face-to-face with the Shroud, which could plausibly explain the existence of paint particles on it.

As I noted previously, the image pixels only penetrate partway into the topmost fibrils of various threads, each of which is about 1/10th the width of a human hair. If the image was induced by anything liquid, there would be evidence of “wicking” (the soaking of the liquid into underlying material), but in this case there is none; the subtlety of whatever mechanism instigated the image is mind-boggling. In order to reproduce an image with this level of subtlety and precision, it would require a computer-driven atomic laser. Is the Shroud a subtle image left by the energy produced when Jesus Christ’s body was resurrected? Only God knows for sure, but it’s hard to think of another plausible way this image could have been formed, or to think of a more fascinating artifact from history.