To be or Not to be the Wright Bros. Photo

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Directly

Your definitely NO expert, I wouldn't listen anything anything you have say--get your expert on here--not you --you really don't know what your talking about!!

And neither are you! Everything you are saying and accusing others of applies just as much, if not more, to you than it ever did to any of them. And what makes your "experts" that supposedly back your opinion on that being the Wrights or Comiskey in the photos any more accurate and believable than everyone else's "experts", the simple fact that you say they are? So what makes you an expert on "experts" that anyone should believe a single thing you say or claim? You also are calling out these people to "get your expert on here", yet I don't believe in any of your threads that you ever once got even one of your "experts" to respond in it to back up your claims and allegations. You are the one making a claim, so the burden of proof falls on you. Get your "experts" to post in this thread then, along with providing their proof of knowledge and expertise, that is only fair since that is what you want everyone else to do, right?

You haven't provided a single, provable and 100% verifiable piece of evidence to demonstrate that is the Wrights or Comiskey in the photos, other than your claim of resemblance, nor have any incontrovertible colloborative provenance to go along with your claims, other than just basically repeating over and over again that you are right and everyone else is wrong. That is exactly what you did in that other thread you started about the alleged Comiskey photo, ignored everyone's valid questions and provided no 100% verifiable evidence or provenance. And yet somehow you declared you were right and they were wrong, and that some "expert" had "screwed the pooch" in your opinion! Exactly how did they do that, since you never did provide that incontrovertible evidence and/or provenance to prove them wrong in that thread, nor this one?

Quite frankly, I almost went to look at a calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1 when you first posted this thread, or the earlier one regarding Comiskey. At least that would provide some reasoning for your posts then, and the seemingly illogical ramblings you make regarding the veracity of your claims, and the unwarranted and disrespectful comments back to people who responded to them.

I do not know the reason for your timing in the posting of this thread. Was it because of the recent post by SteveS regarding his alleged Knickerbocker players photos and all the attention that thread seems to have gotten? Were you jealous and looking for some attention for yourself then? If so, in that thread Steve was nothing but respectful, open minded, and responsive to everyone's questions and knowing he faced an almost impossible task in getting hobbywide acceptance of his claim. He even contacted multiple known "authorities" in regards to baseball history and photography to review his claims, and even went so far as to utilize some facial recognition software to support his position. That same software he so graciously used to examine your claim that those were the Wright brothers in your photo that this thread is supposed to be all about. And what were the results of that examination, that those were most likely not the Wright brothers, correct?

You also don't help your case in the way you can't even even use proper grammar or English when you post. Look at the very first word in your quoted post above, "Your". In that instance the correct English grammar and usage is "You are" or the contraction "You're". It is most certainly not "Your", which implies possession of something. So you are either ignorant of the proper usage of the term, or too lazy to have spelled it properly. Which is it, there are no other options? And I won't even comment about the rest of your grammar in that quoted line, other than to ask that if this is indicative of your knowledge and attention to detail, what might that also say about your ability to properly research and positively identify people in photos from over 100 years ago that one would think requires at least a certain level of those aforementioned attributes to be able to adequately perform?

[BobC]

By the way Directly, did you ever go by the moniker Toppsaholic, or the Real Toppsaholic? I seem to detect some surprising similarities in the way you post and respond to people.

[oldjudge]

Yes, the one on the right is Orville and the one on the left is Wilbur.

[JustinD]

You tried to pass off your Radbourn theory almost 15 years ago on Lemke, who was a fantastic man but not a photo analyst-

https://sportscollectorsdigest.com/a...-cabinet-cards

Now Radbourn is someone else and this (as you told Bob you bought this in 1988) 33 year obsession with making maybe a few hundred bucks on an unprovable photo that a buyer would need to take great risk of believing continues on.

If you would have made even close to same effort over the last 33 years at any other task as you have made on trying to prove this photo you would have quintupled the value of this if it was real. It’s somewhat saddening.

[Directly]

Originally Posted by JustinD

You tried to pass off your Radbourn theory almost 15 years ago on Lemke, who was a fantastic man but not a photo analyst-

https://sportscollectorsdigest.com/a...-cabinet-cards

Now Radbourn is someone else and this (as you told Bob you bought this in 1988) 33 year obsession with making maybe a few hundred bucks on an unprovable photo that a buyer would need to take great risk of believing continues on.

If you would have made even close to same effort over the last 33 years at any other task as you have made on trying to prove this photo you would have quintupled the value of this if it was real. It’s somewhat saddening.

I really don't care what you think either


If You would sell your Dubuque baseball like mine for 500.00 I will take it --do you take PayPal----if you don't have the original to sell please keep your mouth shut--its really none of your business!

[Directly]

Originally Posted by BobC

And neither are you! Everything you are saying and accusing others of applies just as much, if not more, to you than it ever did to any of them. And what makes your "experts" that supposedly back your opinion on that being the Wrights or Comiskey in the photos any more accurate and believable than everyone else's "experts", the simple fact that you say they are? So what makes you an expert on "experts" that anyone should believe a single thing you say or claim? You also are calling out these people to "get your expert on here", yet I don't believe in any of your threads that you ever once got even one of your "experts" to respond in it to back up your claims and allegations. You are the one making a claim, so the burden of proof falls on you. Get your "experts" to post in this thread then, along with providing their proof of knowledge and expertise, that is only fair since that is what you want everyone else to do, right?

You haven't provided a single, provable and 100% verifiable piece of evidence to demonstrate that is the Wrights or Comiskey in the photos, other than your claim of resemblance, nor have any incontrovertible colloborative provenance to go along with your claims, other than just basically repeating over and over again that you are right and everyone else is wrong. That is exactly what you did in that other thread you started about the alleged Comiskey photo, ignored everyone's valid questions and provided no 100% verifiable evidence or provenance. And yet somehow you declared you were right and they were wrong, and that some "expert" had "screwed the pooch" in your opinion! Exactly how did they do that, since you never did provide that incontrovertible evidence and/or provenance to prove them wrong in that thread, nor this one?

Quite frankly, I almost went to look at a calendar to make sure it wasn't April 1 when you first posted this thread, or the earlier one regarding Comiskey. At least that would provide some reasoning for your posts then, and the seemingly illogical ramblings you make regarding the veracity of your claims, and the unwarranted and disrespectful comments back to people who responded to them.

I do not know the reason for your timing in the posting of this thread. Was it because of the recent post by SteveS regarding his alleged Knickerbocker players photos and all the attention that thread seems to have gotten? Were you jealous and looking for some attention for yourself then? If so, in that thread Steve was nothing but respectful, open minded, and responsive to everyone's questions and knowing he faced an almost impossible task in getting hobbywide acceptance of his claim. He even contacted multiple known "authorities" in regards to baseball history and photography to review his claims, and even went so far as to utilize some facial recognition software to support his position. That same software he so graciously used to examine your claim that those were the Wright brothers in your photo that this thread is supposed to be all about. And what were the results of that examination, that those were most likely not the Wright brothers, correct?

You also don't help your case in the way you can't even even use proper grammar or English when you post. Look at the very first word in your quoted post above, "Your". In that instance the correct English grammar and usage is "You are" or the contraction "You're". It is most certainly not "Your", which implies possession of something. So you are either ignorant of the proper usage of the term, or too lazy to have spelled it properly. Which is it, there are no other options? And I won't even comment about the rest of your grammar in that quoted line, other than to ask that if this is indicative of your knowledge and attention to detail, what might that also say about your ability to properly research and positively identify people in photos from over 100 years ago that one would think requires at least a certain level of those aforementioned attributes to be able to adequately perform?

Nuts!--did i spell that to your satisfaction?

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Directly

Nuts!--did i spell that to your satisfaction?

LOL

Yes, thanks, but you have lived up to what you've been doing all along and answered not one single question, nor provided not one single piece of verifiable evidence to prove your claims.

Hey, at least answer my one question, are you ignorant or lazy?

[Directly]

Originally Posted by BobC

LOL

Yes, thanks, but you have lived up to what you've been doing all along and answered not one single question, nor provided not one single piece of verifiable evidence to prove your claims.

Hey, at least answer my one question, are you ignorant or lazy?

Both--

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Directly

Both--

WOW, finally an honest answer!

Too bad no one can get a similar honest response from you to any of their questions to you looking for actual, verifiable proof or evidence to prove your claim that you are right and they are wrong. Nor any response to questions seeking information regarding the credentials of yourself as a self-appointed expert, or of any other expert you claimed to have consulted who supposedly agreed with you. Would also be nice to get a name of any so-called colloborating expert to actually prove you aren't just making that up.

[Directly]

Originally Posted by BobC

WOW, finally an honest answer!

Too bad no one can get a similar honest response from you to any of their questions to you looking for actual, verifiable proof or evidence to prove your claim that you are right and they are wrong. Nor any response to questions seeking information regarding the credentials of yourself as a self-appointed expert, or of any other expert you claimed to have consulted who supposedly agreed with you. Would also be nice to get a name of any so-called colloborating expert to actually prove you aren't just making that up.

Why?--I think you spelled Colloborating incorrectly

[BobC]

Originally Posted by Directly

Why?--I think you spelled Colloborating incorrectly

Did it intentionally to see if you'd catch it, good for you, you noticed. So now that we've proven you are knowledgable and can pay attention to details, how about some proper, detailed responses defending your identity claims?

Everyone is still waiting for answers to their questionss with factual evidence and provenance, and maybe some enlightenment on who your "experts" are, and why they feel your claims are correct.

[BobC]

You should try to be more like SteveS in the other thread about the alleged Knickerbocker players.