Shroud of Turin: Vindication for Jeffrey Hart?

[Geee]

National Review:

For years, the scientific consensus about the Shroud of Turin was that it was a medieval forgery. Former NR senior editor Jeffrey Hart was a dissenter from that view — for a variety of reasons, he believed the Shroud was authentic. Now comes news that scientists at the University of Padua have established that the Shroud does in fact date back to the first century.

Of course, science cannot establish the identity of the person who is depicted on the Shroud, nor a fortiori can it prove that the Gospel accounts of the Resurrection are true. But this news is nonetheless very important, because it disproves the single most important alternative theory about the Shroud, that it was created in the Middle Ages to encourage faith. I also note that is much more imaginable that powerful religio-political authorities in the Middle Ages would have perpetrated such a hoax — either to encourage religious belief per se, or to make money — than that the ragtag, persecuted band of Jesus followers of the first century would have had the time, the inclination, or the ability to do so.