See for yourself:
For starters, Tipler observes that the Shroud of Turin has DNA on it consistent
with an XX male, which would suggest a virgin birth! He has some other really
cool ideas for examining the rocks near the tomb of Jesus for traces of specific
kinds of sub-atomic events. He details his research in Physics
So, I have to wonder - did Tipler the theoretical physicist, whose good buddy and sometimes co-author John Barrow once declared that biologists are not scientists, do much "research" on basic biology? Or don't super-duper smart theoretical physicists with creationist leanings have to bother with actually undetrstanding that sort of thing when they write silly pro-religion, pseudoscience books?
Here's a clue for you two wizards - a human with two X chromosomes is a female.
XX = female
Granted, there is a rare syndrome in which a male can be XX (XX male syndrome), but this is a defect - the result of abnormal crossing-over during meiosis. It results in sterility, abnormal penis and teste development, gyneconmastia, and effeminate characteristics. Does Tipler really want to claim that about his Lord and Savior?
Not to mention that original reports state that XY blood was found, not XX (and if it hjad been XX, how could they tell it had been a male?). Why would it matter?
Well, if Jesus was really born of a virgin, according to Tipler's folk biology/theology, He would have had to have been XX, since Mary would have been XX, and the only outcome of this is an effeminate, gynecomstic infertile man with an abnormal penis and small testes.
All Hail the Son of God!
And Cordova, the BS in physics/engineer creationist, while not enthusiastic about it, reports on it favorably... Anything for the cause, I suppose.
This site goes into more detail on Tipler's nutty claims, including providing this somewhat comical quote from his XX-Jesus chapter:
The full results of the DNA testing of the Shroud were published, he [Tipler] says, in an obscure Italian journal, which included "a computer output of the DNA analyzer."
A computer output of the DNA analyzer... Hmmm.... That is a bit like someone describing a picture taken through a telescope as "an optical output of the far-away object viewer."