I've long thought the Shroud of Turin was legit (won over by evidence of plant pollens from Palestine in it), and recent scientific tests now date it to the time of the 1st century A.D. That despite a carbon dating done about 30 years ago that suggested the shroud originated during the Middle Ages. Which I find interesting in numerous ways. One is that if God left some sort of extraordinary proof in the shroud, enough to have convinced Malcolm Muggeridge (or was it Russell Kirk?) of the veracity of Christianity, then it's kind of funny He didn't protect it from the fire that is said to have resulted in the original Middle Ages dating. Certainly it seems very much an extraneous "proof" since for most of the centuries of Christian belief it has not been publicly available or known.
And it's funny how science tends to get things wrong. (If I went by the latest scientific research I'd be afraid to eat anything for fear of cancer, heart disease or irritable bowel syndrome.) So I guess what these events tell us is: take science with a grain of salt and put not your faith even in the Shroud of Turin. Sometimes I think the existence of the Shroud is God forgetting to tidy up some detail that would too nakedly reveal his existence and thus obviate the need for faith, but that's to think of God as capable of error which is hilariously false!