If you read the post I comment on . It says he's the top Doubled Die and RPM expert. And I think not .
Have you ever noticed, most of the coins I posted from Mr. Wexler site . Most them them have no cross-references and are discovered by Mr. Wexler himself . I've seen first hand, when people send coins to coneca, that are on wexler list . Doesn't make the coneca charts . Why ? " To Small To List " .
Ah yes, but I ask a philosophical question: Is it possible to be an expert in a field not worth doing in the first instance? If it is possible, I nominate Wexler. Of course I partially kid here, but after all, on Big Bang Theory, Sheldon repeatedly claims geology is not a real science.
I'm with you on the majority of these varieties. If I have to use an electron microscope in order to see it, it just doesn't matter.
Not at all. I'm not a doubled die collector or an RPM collector. Some of the doubled dies are so tiny they interest me even less, but that's not to say they don't exist, nor that Wexler is not an expert in this field.
Kurt--- A few days ago I replied to you about our common practice of keeping a Lincoln set with only "found in circulation" coins. Now I see two more traits that we share in common. I too do not care for tiny varieties and errors (but understand others' fascination with them) and I too have kitty litter boxes to clean out.
Wexler is actually hurting the variety world . If you make to many varieties for a year, why collect that year . Everything has a variance . Why does coneca only list 1 for the 2016 Shield Cent .. and wexler list 20 . No variance ...
Rick. Can't remember the date of the cent. Are you by chance thinking of the one with the 154 varities. I gave that one up