Shroud of Turin more legit after research?

[Neo-Scholastic]

Agreed, it's not a painting in any traditional sense. It likely involved pressing the wet cloth against a bas relief sculpture and using a browning agent or process, but which of the available agents or processes was actually used is not readily apparent.

I suppose that's possible and if produced naturally that would have been the most likely method. At the same time, the range of chemicals available during the period was pretty limited...we're taking about the age of alchemy here, although it was also the age of guild trade secrets and the formula could have been easily lost and forgotten. After all, no one knows exactly how Rembrandt achieved his impasto textures either - whether he used some kind of meglip or egg whites. (I think resins have been ruled out).

I don't have dog in this fight. As a Christian I don't rule out miracles but at the same time my faith doesn't hinge on a piece of cloth. Hoaxes were pretty common during the middle ages. You could build a small village from pieces wood said to have come from the True Cross. My only point was that naive skepticism, like assuming it was painted, is nearly as bad a naive gullibility.

---

Someone on reddit enlightened you?

Are we sure it wasn't from 4chan?