which is a funny thing, because I believe the Romans crucified you through the wrists - more painful and prevented the hands from just splitting apart and having their victim fall off the cross...

Absolutely true. There are only three possible explanations:

• The gospel authors, writing decades after the fact about an event which had no reliable eye-witnesses, created the details themselves.
• The Romans made a single, unrecorded and remarkable exception to their normal execution practices and for whatever reason his hands didn't fall apart.
• You don't argue with God. If the gospels say he was nailed through the hands, he was nailed through the hands. Miracles are something he's pretty well known for, after all.

Being a Buddhist and someting of a student of gospel exegesis, I have no problem with position 1. Others with different beliefs can choose or propose their own at will.

don't forget we liked to dip them in tar and light them in our Roman gardens :)

i saw forensic scientist on the discovery channel prove you can be held up by th e middle of your hands, and doing so would punture a ligiment that turns your thumb inward.. ergo there are no thumbs shown on the Shroud

It's something that's *ahem* shrouded in mystery.... ;-)

One thing the Romans did not typically do was crowning their convicted criminals with thorns, something the Shroud clearly shows. But of course whether this was done to someone in AD 29/30 or sometime in the late Middle Ages (talk about suffering for your art!) is a matter for the forensic scientists to prove or disprove.