No, the questions, at most, are very minor variations of "what is your evidence that the Shroud is 2000 years old." In fact, many of them urge you to do what you have promised repeatedly: just provide your evidence that the shroud is 2000 years old, and not get distracted by your own attempts to divert the discussion to something else. From time to time, almost always due to your own postings that switch to these other topics, the questions have included minor versions of "how do you explain the chisel head image" or "why your logic is not logic."
Please stop this nonsense. By your own statements, you spend 3 hours a day posting here, but have yet to address the key question, or any of the few other questions that have been asked of you. The only real answer that you have provided to the question "what is your evidence that the Shroud is 2000 years old?" is that you have no direct evidence of this, and have relied instead on "circumstantial" evidence that is both largely incorrect and (even if correct) only begin to work in an argument if one first assumes the antecedent. If this is your "evidence" then this thread is done. Simply restating and restating your conviction that the evidence proves the authenticity of the Shroud will convince no one else here, and your paucity of legitimate evidence will only prove embarrassing to your argument and convince others of the opposite.
