1921 Herpolsheimers graded w/o mark

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

LOL! Hiccups! Oh, thank you.

"In other words, you are admitting that you cannot explain why a border from the 1930's can appear on a 1921 Holsum Bread card."

Not in other words. Those are the perfect words. Yes, I'm stealing a Hollywood punchline.

A border from the 1930's can appear on a 1921 Holsum Bread card when it is actually not from 1921, but a much later date and to go even further when the printer found the back design for his print.

Thank you. Out of all of the over 300 posts in this thread, yours was the best setup line of any.

Thank you so much.

Waving you the best

So you are saying the 1921 Holsum Bread cards are from a later date?

[Brian Van Horn]

Oops. My cold. So, sorry. Graduated from waive to wave to misreading with a cataract in my left eye. So sorry. Holsum good. Herpolsheimer fraud.

Still, waving you a good day.

Look forward to reading from you.

[molenick]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Oops. My cold. So, sorry. Graduated from waive to wave to misreading with a cataract in my left eye. So sorry. Holsum good. Herpolsheimer fraud.

Still, waving you a good day.

Look forward to reading from you.

But how can Holsum be good? According to the bold print, it has a back design from the 1930's.

[Brian Van Horn]

For, oh, about the fourth time I have covered this with you, but it's entertaining. The Holsum has been known before the 1930s. The Herpolsheimer? Fraud after the creation of the back pattern associated with it and please feel free to note I stated previously in a post that the pattern was close, but I was curious about the other pattern noted by number under the first in the book online. That pattern was not shown. Go to post #240 and scroll down.

Waving you on.

Best with your follow up. Notice how i haven't contradicted myself outside of one cold/cataract moment that just passed.

Another wave.

[Brian Van Horn]

Heads up. Going out shopping. So, if it's a slow response.

[molenick]

No, no more follow-ups. We are going round in circles, so I hereby waive my right to continue to participate in this thread.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

For, oh, about the fourth time I have covered this with you, but it's entertaining.

Welcome to our world Brian…but I assure you it is far less entertaining for us.

Dipping out of the discussion (again)

[John1941]

This is the most surreal thread I've ever seen.

[Brian Van Horn]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Welcome to our world Brian…but I assure you it is far less entertaining for us.

Dipping out of the discussion (again)

Still haven't answered about post 240:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

[rhettyeakley]

Originally Posted by Brian Van Horn

Still haven't answered about post 240:

https://archive.org/details/LanstonM...e/n23/mode/2up

A typographical specimen booklet containing borders and ornaments for casting on the Lanston Monotype Composition Caster, Lanston Monotype Type-Caster, Lanston Monotype Giant Caster and Monotype-Thompson Type-Caster. This booklet is from a Lanston Monotype specimen book (binder) bearing the general title "Monotype Type Faces." It is undated, but based on internal evidence elsewhere in the binder it is from the late 1930s or early 1940s.

This means nothing other than in the 1930-40’s those typographical specimens were known in the printing world It says nothing of whether they existed earlier or not. It proves nothing other than your 1970’s disco “theory” was stupid.

I have provided both concrete and circumstantial evidence based upon subject matter, teams, a full timeline of production where these cards all line up exactly right which would have been unknown to even the best fraudster.

You are grasping as straws and have nothing left. Every theory you have had has been debunked. You are simply being a clown at this point and half of me believes you are doing it on purpose to punk everyone (actually that is the most favorable reason I can think of what you are doing as the alternative is that you really are this thick headed)