imageJabba chimes in. (BTW Jabba also has an interesting comment about the tablecloth controversy.):

– My comment here is based upon only a “light” reading of the debate so far, so no one should take it too seriously. But then, for what it’s worth…

– I tend to think that a corona discharge type of event accounts for the image better than does any other explanation (though, I need to study that further).
– And then, while I wouldn’t be surprised if the image is the product of totally “natural” events, neither would I be surprised if at least part of the image formation is what we would call “supernatural.” Though also, I halfway suspect that what we currently call “supernatural” (ESP, Precognition, etc.) is just not currently understood, and will someday be considered quite “natural” — quantum mechanics may be pointing the way.
– But also, I doubt that “faith” needs to be blind. In fact, I suspect that it should NOT be TOTALLY blind. (Not to dismiss their claims out of hand, but if blind faith were all that were needed, we could easily be tied into the Quran, or The Book of Mormon, instead of the Bible.) I sort of suspect that faith always requires something of a “leap,” but some of us can leap further than can others of us. For me, being a short leaper, the Shroud (whether natural, or supernatural) has been of significant help. I am “naturally” drawn to the other side, and since I began seriously studying the Shroud, my possibility of actually making that crossing has grown by LEAPS AND BOUNDS. (Trying to be cute, that last sentence was stretching a little, but the Shroud does seem to have added significantly to my suspicion that Jesus really was the prophesied Jewish Messiah.)

– You’ve gotta admit — this is exciting stuff!

The Ron and Yannick Shroud of Turin Image Discussion « Shroud of Turin Blog