Shroud of Turin

I have an admitted fascination with the Shroud of Turin.  I am convinced of it's authenticity - on a gut-level, as well as an intellectual level.  I look at this face, and see my Lord.  I recognize Him.  My heart says "oh yes.  That's Him.  There He is."  When I saw Passion of the Christ - I recognized Him.

When I saw Akiane's picture of Jesus, I recognized him.

  And when I saw "the real face of Jesus" from the History Channel's reconstructing the image on the Shroud of Turin... it was Him again.  

This is not the wan, frail-looking man from so many paintings.   This is the face I recognize from my most vivid dreams. Strong, robust. The face I KNOW. 

That's all highly subjective, though, and far from scientific proof.  My gut, although I trust it, could very well be wrong.  The scientific evidence supporting the Shroud, though, is actually substantive and extremely convincing. 

The most recent finding is this study by Marzio Boi, a university researcher at the University of the Balearic Islands who specializes in palynology, proving that the pollen on the shroud is the same as found on burial sheets in Asia Minor 2000 years.

Other recent findings show how the image was apparently created by a flash of intense radiation, of a quanity that is not currently able to be produced by known methods.  The infamous carbon dating is found to have been accurate - but taken from a sample of cloth that was repaired in the middle ages.  The blood type (AB) is the SAME blood type as found on the Sudarium of Oveido - believed to be the burial face cloth of Christ.  The wounds of the image, which is only microns thick, correspond directly to the wounds of Christ described in the Bible.  The cloth itself is made of a linen found in the burial cloths of wealthy people in an area just east of Israel, at the time of Christ.  I think at this point no one even contradicts the fact that this cloth covered an actual corpse of a crucified man - and is in no way, shape, or form a painting.

A summary of the scientific research can be found here, and at www.shroud.com.  Los Alamos Laboratories and the STURP committee have done extensive research as well. 

It seems to me that the evidence leads to a conclusion that many just don't want to make.  Skeptics say that the Shroud cannot be authentic because the idea that Jesus rose from the dead and left behind an image is IMPOSSIBLE - not because that is not the way the evidence points.  In essence ruling out a hypothesis because in their minds, it "can't" happen.  And generally, they'd be right.  Except this one, isolated time in all of history, when something absolutely FANTASTIC and UNBELIEVEABLE did happen.  And it changed everything.