A Landmark Scientific Investigation
All photographs courtesy STURP member Barrie Schwortz per Ateneo Pontificio Regina Apostolrum, Rome
In October 1978, a team of over 30 scientists, engineers, and medical professionals came together in Turin, Italy, under the name of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). Their mission was to perform a rigorous scientific analysis of the Shroud of Turin—a linen cloth bearing the image of a crucified man, believed by millions to be Jesus of Nazareth.¹ What they discovered has left science with more questions than answers.
The STURP team had access to the Shroud for 120 uninterrupted hours and performed dozens of non-destructive tests, including X-ray fluorescence, ultraviolet and infrared photography, microscopy, and spectroscopy.² Their findings—later published in peer-reviewed scientific journals—have withstood decades of scrutiny and remain among the most carefully documented research on any religious relic.
Key Scientific Findings
1. The Image Is Superficial—But Impossible to Replicate
One of the most astonishing discoveries was that the image rests only on the topmost surface of the linen fibers—penetrating no more than 0.2 microns.³ It doesn’t soak through, and no substance like paint or dye can account for the image. Multiple chemical tests confirmed this.⁴ According to the STURP summary, “No pigments, paints, dyes or stains have been found on the fibrils.”⁵
This kind of superficial image—without directionality, pressure, or brush strokes—is unique in all known ancient or modern artwork. To this day, no one has reproduced it using any method known to science.
2. The Image Contains 3D Spatial Data
The Shroud image was analyzed using a VP-8 Image Analyzer—a NASA-developed device that converts light intensity into topographical relief. Ordinary photographs or paintings produce distorted shapes when analyzed this way. The Shroud, however, rendered a natural three-dimensional relief of a human body.⁶ This suggests the image is not simply a flat imprint but encodes vertical distance from the cloth to the body—an unknown phenomenon in medieval or ancient imaging.
3. The Blood Is Real, Human, and Consistent with Crucifixion
Drs. John Heller and Alan Adler conducted chemical and forensic testing on the reddish stains across the cloth. Their peer-reviewed analysis confirmed the presence of real human blood—type AB—along with hemoglobin, bilirubin, and serum halos invisible to the naked eye but revealed under ultraviolet light.⁷ These features match the trauma of crucifixion, including scourging, puncture wounds, and blood flow consistent with a body in vertical suspension.⁸
Notably, the blood was applied before the image, not afterward—a critical blow to the “forgery” hypothesis.⁹ As Adler later said, “The blood chemistry is so complex it could not have been faked by a forger in any century, much less the 14th.”¹⁰
4. A Negative Before Photography
When the Shroud was first photographed in 1898 by Secondo Pia, the negative plate revealed a startling discovery: the Shroud itself was a photographic negative. The image appeared more lifelike and realistic in reverse lighting, something utterly unknown before the invention of photography.¹¹ No medieval artist could have designed such an effect—especially when the photographic process wouldn’t be invented for another 600 years.
5. Perfect Anatomical and Dorsal-Ventral Alignment
The image on the Shroud shows both front and back views of a man, perfectly aligned, with no side image. The body lies straight, with no signs of distortion or compression. Blood flows and anatomical details (such as nail placement through wrists rather than palms) are consistent with modern medical knowledge of crucifixion—knowledge medieval forgers simply didn’t possess.
What About the Carbon Dating?
In 1988, radiocarbon dating tests concluded the Shroud dated to 1260–1390 AD, fueling skepticism. But these tests were conducted on a corner of the cloth later identified as part of a medieval repair—a theory confirmed by Raymond Rogers, a STURP chemist. His 2005 paper in Thermochimica Acta showed that the tested area contained cotton, dye, and other foreign material not found in the main body of the cloth.¹² As Rogers wrote, “The sample was not representative of the original cloth.”¹³
This means the carbon dating result—while accurately dating the repair—has no bearing on the age of the Shroud itself.
How the Shroud Defies Forgery Theories
Unlike other known medieval relics—which clearly show signs of artistry, paint layers, or poor anatomical proportions—the Shroud is different:
- No paint or pigment can be found.
- The bloodstains were present before the image.
- It contains medically accurate details of crucifixion.
- It encodes 3D data and is a photographic negative.
- The image cannot be replicated today, even with modern technology.
Skeptics often claim, “It could have been faked.” But if so, why can’t anyone reproduce it with all the characteristics listed above?
As STURP physicist John Jackson concluded:
“We do not know of any physical, chemical, biological, or artistic mechanism that can account for the image.”¹⁴
In his paper, Is the Shroud of Turin a Medieval Photograph? A Critical Examination of the Theory, the late Barrie Schwortz—an Orthodox Jew and original STURP team member, and one of the world’s leading experts on the Shroud—demonstrated that all known attempts to replicate the Shroud fall short. At best, they manage to reproduce only isolated features, never the full range of its unique and complex characteristics. I had the distinct honor of studying under Barrie Schwortz at the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum in Rome, where his passion, integrity, and scientific rigor left a lasting impact on my own research.
A Logical Syllogism:
- If the Shroud is a forgery, there must be a known or reproducible method for creating the image.
- No known method—natural, artistic, or technological—can reproduce the Shroud’s image.
- Therefore, it is highly improbable that the Shroud is a forgery.
In my research applying Bayesian probability (see Sacred Threads), the likelihood of the Shroud being a forgery is calculated at less than 1 in 10⁶⁰, resulting in a probability of authenticity exceeding 99.99999%.
Peer-Reviewed Studies and Primary Publications
- John H. Heller and Alan D. Adler, “A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin,” Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal.¹⁵
- John P. Jackson, Eric J. Jumper, and William R. Ercoline, “Correlation of Image Intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3D Structure of a Human Body,” Applied Optics.¹⁶
- L.A. Schwalbe and Raymond N. Rogers, “Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin,” Analytica Chimica Acta.¹⁷
- Raymond N. Rogers, “Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample from the Shroud of Turin,” Thermochimica Acta.¹⁸
An Ongoing Mystery
The Shroud of Turin stands as a scientific and spiritual enigma. STURP’s conclusions were clear: the image is not painted, the blood is real, and no known process can explain how the image was formed.
Even for those who don’t accept it as the burial cloth of Jesus, one fact remains: it shouldn’t exist. And yet, it does.
Footnotes
- Barrie M. Schwortz, “The 1978 Scientific Examination of the Shroud of Turin,” Shroud.com, https://www.shroud.com/pdfs/schwortz2p.pdf.
- Ibid.
- L.A. Schwalbe and Raymond N. Rogers, “Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin,” Analytica Chimica Acta 135 (1982).
- Ibid.
- “STURP Summary Report,” https://www.shroud.com/78conclu.htm.
- John P. Jackson et al., “3D Structure of a Human Body,” Applied Optics 23, no. 14 (1984).
- John Heller and Alan Adler, “Chemical Investigation,” Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal 14, no. 3 (1981).
- Ibid.
- Ibid.
- Quoted in Ian Wilson, The Blood and the Shroud (New York: Free Press, 1998).
- Pia’s discovery noted in multiple sources including Ian Wilson, The Shroud of Turin: The Burial Cloth of Jesus Christ? (Doubleday, 1978).
- Raymond N. Rogers, “Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample,” Thermochimica Acta 425 (2005).
- Ibid.
- Jackson et al., Applied Optics.
- Heller and Adler, Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal.
- Jackson et al., Applied Optics.
- Schwalbe and Rogers, Analytica Chimica Acta.
- Rogers, Thermochimica Acta.
Appendix: Peer-Reviewed Publications by STURP Members
(Hyper-links to papers as reposted on www.shroud.com)
The following are peer-reviewed scientific articles published by members of the Shroud of Turin Research Project (STURP). They represent the most significant contributions to Shroud research and remain essential reading for anyone investigating the topic scientifically.
1. John H. Heller and Alan D. Adler
“A Chemical Investigation of the Shroud of Turin”
Canadian Society of Forensic Science Journal, 14, no. 3 (1981)
This foundational paper presents chemical and forensic analysis confirming the presence of real human blood and associated compounds on the Shroud.
2. L.A. Schwalbe and Raymond N. Rogers
“Physics and Chemistry of the Shroud of Turin: A Summary of the 1978 Investigation”
Analytica Chimica Acta, 135 (1982)
A comprehensive overview of STURP’s findings, analyzing the image, bloodstains, and cloth properties using multiple scientific disciplines.
3. John P. Jackson, Eric J. Jumper, and William R. Ercoline
“Correlation of Image Intensity on the Turin Shroud with the 3D Structure of a Human Body”
Applied Optics, 23, no. 14 (1984)
This groundbreaking paper shows that the Shroud image encodes accurate 3D spatial data, unlike any known artwork or photograph.
4. Eric J. Jumper and Richard W. Mottern
“Scientific Investigation of the Shroud of Turin”
IEEE Proceedings, 70, no. 6 (1982)
Presents an engineering-focused summary of STURP’s data, with emphasis on image analysis and testing procedures.
5. Samuel F. Pellicori and Mark S. Evans
“Preliminary Results of the Scientific Examination of the Shroud of Turin”
IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine (January 1981)
Early results focusing on imaging techniques and preliminary chemical observations.
6. Raymond N. Rogers
“Studies on the Radiocarbon Sample from the Shroud of Turin”
Thermochimica Acta, 425, no. 1–2 (2005)
Rogers argues that the carbon-14 sample used in 1988 came from a medieval repair, not the original linen—calling into question the dating results.
7. Additional Internal Papers and Technical Reports
STURP scientists also produced internal technical reports and unpublished studies. Many of these are archived at:
www.shroud.com/papers.htm
Tom's Theology Blog 
Leave a comment