cut from outside edge (exactly where the C-14 experts say to avoid due to possibilities of excess contamination.) One cannot dismiss the Shroud’s authenticity based on the C-14 alone. Science must be in harmony to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion. This is not the case with the Shroud. After the year 2000 more testing will be done that may answer some of these questions. In the meantime, the Shroud remains one of the greatest mystery stories of all times.” (www.shroud.com) “Primary Test Results from X-Ray-Fluorescene resulted that there was no detectable in elemental composition between image and non-image areas, and concluded that no inorganic pigments present. On X-Radiography resulted that there was no density discontinuities associated with the body image and therefore no substances manually applied to the cloth. On Photoelectric Spectrophotometry resulted that that there was no spectral characteristics of stains, dyes or pigments were detected in the image and non-image areas and therefore no typical artistic substances are on the cloth. Tests on the Ultraviolet Fluorescene resulted that there was no evidence of aromatic acids and therefore no collagen binder as would be used with paint.” (www.shroud.com) The Holy Shroud of Turin is indeed not painted. As stated by Adam Otterbein, “photography has also been used to reduce the size of the two life-size images , thus defining then more clearly and anatomical details was thus revealed. The anatomical proportion of the two figures is superior to that of even the great masterpieces of painting. This fact and the absence of pigment from the cloth further weaken the painting theory.” (Otterbein 1996, p:250.) “Scientific evidence which came to light after the Shroud was photograph for the first time in, 1898 by Secondo Pia, strengthens the view that the image was not painted but an actual imprint of a human corpse. It was then discovered that the...
