Can't they just test it?

Any baseball fan will remember Curt Schilling's sock from the 2004 ALCS against the Yankees. In game six, blood seeped through the sock because Schilling had just had the tendon in his ankle stitched together. It was a visual reminder of the sacrifice a committed athlete makes to win it all.

Or so we thought.

Now baseball broadcaster Gary Thorne is claiming catched Doug Mirabelli told him that the sock wasn't bloody but rather, just painted. Mirabelli denies this, calling Thorne a liar.

I'm not sure who to believe. On the one hand, it really did look like blood, and Schilling is known for his (sometimes brutal, sometimes inappropriate) honesty. On the other, the bloody sock has become a thing of legend and made someone who clearly cares about his fame even more popular.

But can't they just test what's on the sock? In his blog, Schilling wrote that the first, really, really bloody sock was thrown in with the laundry, but his second, less bloody sock (worn during the World Series) is in the Hall of Fame. So why not just do some tests and get an answer?