In 1978 the Vatican allowed a group of scientists called STURP (Shroud of Turin Research Project) — most of who were deeply religious — to examine the shroud.
That said, it’s unfortunate that almost all of those that made up this group were deeply religious, and many were not specialised in the field they investigated. The group consisted of 40 US scientists, made up of 39 devout believers and 1 agnostic. The makeup of this group was stacked and very biased towards authenticating the shroud, and therefore their claims must be taken with an extremely large grain of salt.
Unfortunately almost all of these scientists were deeply religious, many were not specialised in the field they investigated and they were actively trying to prove its authenticity.
‘Unfortunately, almost all of these were religious believers, most of them were Roman Catholics’,
He repeatedly attacks the STURP team because they were “deeply religious”. This would be the ad hominem fallacy. It doesn’t matter what is one’s faith to show veracity of an argument, but the evidence. Also, does he even know what religion all the STURP team members are, let alone being “devout” believers? If so, I’d like to know because I cannot find that information anywhere. Yes, there are several Catholics on the STURP team, but that does not automatically mean they are incompetent.