Ok I’ll help you out.
-
The “German scholar Gressman” died in 1927, and the “French scholar Daniel-Rops” died in 1965. These are woefully outdated sources, neither of whom had any qualifications in the relevant fields. Why do Sevenson and Habermas have to reach so far back to these two random sources?
-
The appeal to unnamed “orthodox Jewish rabbis and scholars” is worthless without properly referenced citations and evidence; certainly “orthodox Jewish rabbis” are not remotely the best source for conclusions on this matter.
-
This doesn’t address any of the very clear archaeological evidence we have for the way Jewish men typically wore their hair in the first century, or any of the modern scholarship which overwhelmingly agrees Jesus would most likely have worn his hair like this.
Unsurprisingly the article only quotes people who believe the shroud is genuine, without addressing why other people don’t believe this is evidence of a man who was scourged and then wrapped in the shroud, and who don’t believe there are any genuine bloodstains on the shroud.