"The most condemning evidence that the Shroud is not legitimate came from a
scientific expedition in 1987 that carbon dated some fibers from the Shroud as
being no more than 750 years old. However, current research is re-examining that
dating as being wrongly affected by a fire that almost destroyed the Shroud in
1532."
The page at http://www.cais.com/npacheco/shroud/turin.html and it's nice, though
IMHO is written by somebody who would like to believe in it and would like us to
believe he is impartial. Which is undertandable- why would he bother if he
didn't believe in it?