Its as Plain as the Nose on your Face-the Ear Thing isn't Gospel

[bigtrain]

Haven't looked at this thread for a few
days. Amazing that this discussion continues.

[murphusa]

if you have to work really hard to convince yourself that something is what you hope it would be,

how hard do you have to work to convince some one else that it is?

or put another way

what a f'in a**hole I am for believing this story and spending the money for this that now I need to find another a**hole to buy it from me

[Nashvol]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

Haven't looked at this thread for a few
days. Amazing that this discussion continues.

Same or me. Entertaining, no doubt.

[Directly]

A Legitimate 1913 Liberty Nickel is Condemned as a Fake?--here is the article:

George Walton was killed in a car accident heading to a 1962 coin show supposedly with his 1913 Nickel.

There was much speculation about the whereabouts of the coin. Some people were certain that someone had stolen it, while others felt it had been lost at the scene. Apparently Walton's heirs never clarified matters. They had found a 1913 Liberty Head Nickel in Walton's effects at home following his death, and taken it to a leading numismatic firm for authentication. The experts at this firm condemned the coin as a fake (stating that it was a genuine coin which had been altered.) Following this news, the Walton heirs kept quiet about things and for forty years, nobody knew what had ever happened to the Walton specimen.

By this time, the Walton heirs had seen many photos of the other genuine 1913 Liberty Nickels, thanks to the Internet. Careful comparisons had been made, and they became convinced that their coin was worth another look, perhaps by a different expert. Imagine the stunned surprise when a Walton family member showed up at that 2003 World's Fair of Money to have their specimen examined! At least SIX different world-class experts examined the Walton coin, and they unanimously agreed that the coin was genuine! The lost 1913 Liberty Nickel had been found!

When I sent my photo to the Museum's, HOF and others, all I ask the photo be saved in their computer system for historian studies.

If some can't understand, then some are not collectors. I have owned the photo for 25 years--another 15 years is OK with me!

[bmarlowe1]

So - what happened to all the other names you had for such a long time on your photo? On 9-25 you changed Rowe to Laurie Reis and Cliff Carroll to Alveretta. I thought you stand by your "insight without reservation." And now, you've taken all the names away except Comiskey. If you won't stand by your previous IDs, why should anyone think you have any idea as to how as to ID Comiskey?

Your bogus "Reis" is below left. The real Reis from the 1878 Chi NL composite is below center, and Reis from the actual 1879 Dubuque photo is below right. So, it appears that in 1878 and 1879 the real Reis had curly hair (and an inconvenient mustache). I guess for your photo he must have had his hair straightened. He also had a very different skull and jaw geometry compared to your photo.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by bmarlowe1

So - what happened to all the other names you had for such a long time on your photo? On 9-25 you changed Rowe to Laurie Reis and Cliff Carroll to Alveretta. I thought you stand by your "insight without reservation." And now, you've taken all the names away except Comiskey. If you won't stand by your previous IDs, why should anyone think you have any idea as to how as to ID Comiskey?

Your bogus "Reis" is below left. The real Reis from the 1878 Chi NL composite is below center, and Reis from the actual 1879 Dubuque photo is below right. So, it appears that in 1878 and 1879 the real Reis had curly hair (and an inconvenient mustache). I guess for your photo he must have had his hair straightened. He also had a very different skull and jaw geometry compared to your photo.

Why are you bothering?????????

[thecatspajamas]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Why are you bothering?????????

For one, because it's clear that Directly is intent on having his own faulty summary, complete with photo labeled the way HE wants it to appear, be the final post in this thread, probably hoping that whoever happens upon this thread later will see how incredibly long it is, skip ahead to the end, and accept his faulty summary as the real conclusion of the matter.

This whole thing is less like a single expert telling you that your prized rare nickel is a fake, and more like a panel of experts advising you that it is in fact a quarter.

[Lordstan]

Originally Posted by thecatspajamas

For one, because it's clear that Directly is intent on having his own faulty summary, complete with photo labeled the way HE wants it to appear, be the final post in this thread, probably hoping that whoever happens upon this thread later will see how incredibly long it is, skip ahead to the end, and accept his faulty summary as the real conclusion of the matter.

This whole thing is less like a single expert telling you that your prized rare nickel is a fake, and more like a panel of experts advising you that it is in fact a quarter.

This is exactly why, despite the fact that I think attempting to convince him is a waste of time, I have continued to reply.
He is clearly trying to manipulate the wording of posts in this, and the previous thread, to create the appearance that the people here agree with him. It is apparent, if you read either thread that no one, who has posted a reply, even remotely agrees with him.

The fact that he WANTS the kid in the photo to be Comiskey is clear. The fact that it ISN'T Comiskey has been proven over and over again. This should also be very clear.