Why don't we see a double-blood signature, one as real blood, one as 'body image', at least when out of stereoregister?

 There's a new posting on shroudstory.com right now that renews the claim that the teeth are imaged on the Shroud of Turin (previously  the subject of  wacky notions about X-ray imaging).

(Incidentally, the second of those two links credits "August Accetta" with being a member of the 1978 STURP team. That is mistaken identity. It was Joseph Accetta of the Lockheed Corporation who was a STURP associate).


Personally,  like many others, some proponents of authenticity included, I don't see teeth, and have just this minute added a couple of high magnification, high resolution Shroud Scope images, contrast-enhanced, to the tail end of a recent posting re other questionable body features (beard, moustache, closed eyes etc)

Why should teeth, the outer layer of which is hard, dead, highly mineralised enamel (96% crystalline calcium phosphate) produce an image on linen? Why should anything image for that matter, at least in those other wacky radiation models?

To specifics:

 We see hair (dead keratin, a protein, even in life) imprinting its image as well as exposed skin (also dead keratin) and now we are told that tooth enamel does too.   So why not blood one may ask, which is not only predominantly protein, but also has  living cells (red blood cells, white blood cells) up to, and probably for a short time after death which must in any case leave fibrin blood clots, dead cell debris  etc still loaded with proteins.

Ah, but blood DOES image, I hear folk say, but directly as real bloodstains  Sure it does  if we  accept, for the sake of argument,  that they are real 2000 year old human bloodstains on the TS.. But there are other difficulties with identifying the TS blood as authentic. I refer to the splashes and trickles on or down the hair. Blood does not trickle from head wounds ("crown of thorns") down hair as if the latter were continuous unbroken surface like skin. It would tend to matt hair before reaching the surface of the strands.

But there's an explanation for that, we are told, and it's clever, like so many other "explanations" where TS oddities and inconsistencies are concerned.   The  reason for there being blood trickles down the hair is allegedly because the blood was imaged directly by a blotting paper effect prior to body imaging, so  ends up out of stereoregister with body image*. As I say, smart...

If that's the case, then why isn't there a double blood image, one set on the cheek,  as a subset of "body image" say, matching exactly the blood trails on the adjacent hair?

I repeat: if  dead protein like keratin, whether fibrous or not, and even mineralized tooth enamel can leave an image, then why not the distinctive cell debris and proteins of blood?  The  latter should remain in stereoregister with the fabric of the Shroud, right through the imaging process, regardless of where the "real blood" relocated due to relative shifting of corpse within Shroud or that highly suspect "orthogonal imaging" assumption that accompanies radiation models.


* See this  graphic and accompanying explanation (below)  on Stephen E.Jones's   theshroudofturin.blogspot site:

Jones's words (my bolding):

"The blood marks in the hair along the sides of the face (see above) are actually on the sides of the face and temples of the man's body[50]. That is those blood marks on the cloth are out of stereoregister with the Shroud's image of the physical face and temples upon which they were[51]. As we shall see in "10. How was the Image Formed?", this is explained by Dr. John Jackson's "Cloth Collapse Theory"[52].