Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;GDJMSP, post: 13920351, member: 112&quot;]True - with the key word being <u>some</u>.</p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p>True again, but again only in some cases.</p><p><br /></p><p>If a coin is artificially toned by applying a liquid, powders, or some other substance to the coin, then that coin can be positively identified as having been artificially toned by those with the knowledge and ability to do so.</p><p><br /></p><p>But when a coin is toned as a result of being stored in a coin album, paper envelopes, or anything of the like, or simply by being exposed to the air - and that includes coins in any slab or commercial coin holder because none of them are airtight - that cannot be positively identified by any means. And in all of those cases, intent is the only difference.</p><p><br /></p><p>The true key to the basic question is defining artificial. And therein lies the problem and why a consensus can seemingly never be reached - because too many have different definitions for artificial.</p><p><br /></p><p>Even the TPG&#039;s, with all of their resources, cannot determine if a coin is NT or AT in most cases. Sure, as I mentioned above, there are some cases when they can, but in the majority of cases they cannot. And they readily admit this. And that is why they do not label a coin as AT. The most they can do is guess and call the toning questionable.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in