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

[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.

[marvymelvin]

Are directly and evajoy91 the same person?? Or is it just bad luck to have two pains in the asses running at the same time. I just can't for the life of me figure out why they don't just accept the information and move on even if they decide they do not not want to accept the advice. Just smile and wave for hell sake! Hey I ask for advice from people all of the time, some of the time I agree and some of the time I don't, but I never ask and then argue. It is common sense and common decency.

[Directly]

[QUOTE=marvymelvin;1333154]Are directly and evajoy91 the same person?? Or is it just bad luck to have two pains in the asses running at the same time. I just can't for the life of me figure out why they don't just accept the information and move on even if they decide they do not not want to accept the advice. Just smile and wave for hell sake! Hey I ask for advice from people all of the time, some of the time I agree and some of the time I don't, but I never ask and then argue. It is common sense and common decency.[/QUOTE

I'm happy-, but for the record not one time have I mocked, insulted, or name called anyone. If so I apologize. I tried to present facts.

It really doesn't matter what we say, the Photograph is here to stay


There have been many great discoveries requiring trial and error before becoming successful. This is my last response to this thread and hopefully will leave the members the impression of possibilities.

Due to the fact we know Comiskey is the one constant recorded baseball player in my Dubuque Rabbits photograph to have played baseball in Dubuque the four years 1878-1881.

In 1880 Ted Sullivan decided that a free lance combination would be less risky and in 1880 the semi-professional team succeeded the Northwestern league title holders.

( 1878-1881 Dubuque Rabbits baseball team roster )

1878--Comiskey and others

1879--Comiskey, Tom Sullivan, LP Reis, Lapham, Radbourn, Bill and Jack Gleason, Ted Sullivan, J Ross, Tom Loftus, Taylor
and Alveretta

1880--Comiskey and others

1881--Comiskey 1b, Ted Sullivan ss-p., Loftus 2b, Ross c., Burns 3b., Lear rf., Morrison ss-p., Keys lf., and Phelan cf

The 1882 US census shows Ted Sullivan resided in St Louis staying with his uncle. We know Comiskey didn't own a copy, so very likely Sullivan took the photo with him to St Louis. Comiskey named Reis and Alveretta in a photo, so is this the photo?

I do want thank a few of our forum members insight.-- in Missouri we call this research.

Thanks again!