Shroud of Turin more legit after research?

[Rev. Rye]

Or they could have just looked at the herringbone weave and noticed that this was highly unusual for a burial shroud in 1st century Jesusalem. Or that carbon dating on it dated it between 1260 and 1390.

And maybe they could have noticed that it didn't jibe with this little passage from the Gospel of John:

Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie, And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself…

Notice that this description blatantly contradicts the Shroud, because the Shroud has a whole face, while John describes it as being wrapped separately from it. So, believers have two options to deal with this discrepancy: either the Shroud of Turin (which has a whole face) is not the burial shroud of Jesus, or the Gospel of John erred in its description of Jesus' burial shroud. Naturally, both possibilities can be true simultaneously, but either one is a huge blow for the Shroud's believers.

TL;DR: The Shroud of Turin is about as canonical as the Manger Babies.