How to Make Your Own Shroud of Turin

Illustration for article titled How to Make Your Own Shroud of Turin

Further proving that the Shroud of Turin—a linen cloth that believers say covered Jesus after the crucifixion—is a big fake, scientists have made a reproduction using inexpensive materials and easy techniques from the Middle Ages. This is how:

Italian chemist Luigi Garlaschelli and his team used the same type of linen. First they aged the cloth with heat, using a normal oven, and washing it with water. The shroud was placed over a student covered in red ochre, using a mask that simulated Jesus' alleged physiognomy. They kept aging and washing the shroud, adding the necessary blood stains in the process.

Illustration for article titled How to Make Your Own Shroud of Turin

This easy to do, inexpensive one-week process resulted in exactly the same look as the Shroud of Turin, which has been repeatedly proven to be a fake made around the 14th Century using different dating techniques.


Would this convince the believers? Garlaschelli says he doubt it:

Many still believe that the shroud has unexplainable characteristics that cannot be reproduced by human means. But the result obtained clearly indicates that this could be done with the use of inexpensive materials and with a quite simple procedure.

If they don't want to believe carbon dating done by some of the world's best laboratories they certainly won't believe me.

Indeed Luigi, indeed. These people won't take scientific proof that the relic is fake because they just like to do the Mulder and want to believe. Now, go back to kill Koopa Troopas and Goombas after killing God yet one more time. I'm going to pull a Nietzsche and find myself a linen cloth to try. [BBC and Daily Mail]

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



I'm far from a true believer, but let's get real. This "proves" ABSOLUTELY NOTHING about the shroud itself. All it "proves" is that it is POSSIBLE to fake it, NOT that it was faked. This kind of loose-cannon reasoning is something that should have been explained in a Logic 101 class in your freshman year at college, and is highly disappointing from supposed "scientists" who very obviously don't understand the most basic concepts in reasoning.

If I take I-70 from Denver to St. Louis, and someone else takes I-70 from Columbus to St. Louis, it doesn't mean Denver=Columbus, even if we do end up in the same place.