Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;Kevin Flynn, post: 2686074, member: 75567&quot;]Kurt</p><p>You and I are alot alike, I read everything, but question everything, figure it out for myself.&nbsp; I also enjoy when people challenge what I wrote, because then they become true numismatists, I hated the 90s, when people read Breen and said it was true because it was in writing.&nbsp; If I am not sure on inconclusive, I but all options and theories out there, draw my conclusions, but intentionally leave the door open so as to inspire others to figure it out for themselves.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>Some stuff is open to interpretation, but other stuff like clear archive records speak for themselves.&nbsp; </p><p><br /></p><p>I might disagree with your right person analysis, I look at it from a experience perspective.&nbsp; No one has looked at more proofs an knows about 18th and 19th century proofs than JD.&nbsp; When I ask any expert, their response is what does JD thinks.&nbsp; Its not about that JD is stating it as he is the right person, it is that he has the experience and what he says is so logical and based upon hard evidence.&nbsp; I have studied proofs extensively, from the archives history perspective and the coins.&nbsp; I write books to force me to learn as much as possible and figure everything out.&nbsp; Experience is the ultimate teacher, it is not a gift, right person, or whatever, it is learning through studying.&nbsp; I am working on a book on branch mint proofs which will push me further to learn more.</p><p><br /></p><p>You have me curious on the federal jury thing, guessing it is the 1933 twenty you are speaking of.</p><p><br /></p><p>Kevin[/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