Fair enough, and thank you for frank engagement here. I was taken aback by our differences in wording, I guess, over trinitarian doctrine. To say "God in 3 Persons" is not controversial except in Islam or Nestorian type Christianities (or I guess Unitarian? I don't know. UUs are mostly atheists if not in theory certain in my experience around them).

I do think you're missing out, unless you are either 1) so very up on all the facts, mysteries, and Mysteries around the shroud, or 2) if you are not interested in them. The owner of the shroud gave it to scientists, some Christian, some not, to do what ever testing they could on it with out destroying it. These are the only people ever to gain such thorough access to it and so anyone else speculating about it are just doing that: speculating. This guy happened to be the who documented it all, and he did an admirable job. I don't see his contribution very different than say the way Aquinas used Aristotle or even Islamic theologians when using them served best when he was writing his theological works.

I also strongly suspect anything you hear about the shroud would then be a watered down version of Barrie is providing, because he is one who is most out front with the best information about it. One does not have know anything about the shroud, believe anything said about by anyone, or be suspicious of it: it can help those it helps or it can be an unknown (as I guess it is to most people).