There is evidence of radiation that created the image of the man's teeth in the SoT, from behind the skin of the lips and mouth. The elongated finger structures captured in the SoT are the man's hand and finger bones, also seen "through" the skin of the hands and fingers. This was initially thought to be a deformity of the man in the SoT, but closer examination reveals certain parts of the man in the shroud appear to have to be radiographic qualities depicting teeth and bones, much like an X-Ray.
The article and reproduction do not mention this characteristic of the SoT and do not seem to account for it. Was it just a super clever group of artists that could nearly perfectly depict an image that looks like an X-Ray, even though no one had ever seen an X-Ray before? Not to say one unaddressed detail makes the shroud authentic, but to debunk it, there must be a rational "reasonable doubt" explanation of every detail not represented when one claims to have made a perfect duplicate. It can't be "close" or a "proof of concept." All the intricacies must be addressed and duplicated. Otherwise, the "duplicate" comes off looking more like the forgery.
Truth exists outside of the contrivances and contortions of the human mind.
There is evidence of radiation that created the image of the man's teeth in the SoT, from behind the skin of the lips and mouth. The elongated finger structures captured in the SoT are the man's hand and finger bones, also seen "through" the skin of the hands and fingers. This was initially thought to be a deformity of the man in the SoT, but closer examination reveals certain parts of the man in the shroud appear to have to be radiographic qualities depicting teeth and bones, much like an X-Ray.
The article and reproduction do not mention this characteristic of the SoT and do not seem to account for it. Was it just a super clever group of artists that could nearly perfectly depict an image that looks like an X-Ray, even though no one had ever seen an X-Ray before? Not to say one unaddressed detail makes the shroud authentic, but to debunk it, there must be a rational "reasonable doubt" explanation of every detail not represented when one claims to have made a perfect duplicate. It can't be "close" or a "proof of concept." All the intricacies must be addressed and duplicated. Otherwise, the "duplicate" comes off looking more like the forgery.
Truth exists outside of the contrivances and contortions of the human mind.