Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 1943041, member: 26302&quot;]Wait. So now its acceptable to say that as long as something is possible, anything at all, (which is convenient since logically you cannot disprove a negative), we have to accept it? What if the TPG slabbed a series of coins as &quot;having been owned by PT Barnum&quot;. They do not have to prove they WERE owned, and since we cannot prove they WEREN&#039;T own by him, we have to just accept it? That is what you are saying here, that the TPG is claiming something unprovable, that the CLEAR AND PROVABLE WEAR is caused by &quot;cabinet friction&quot; and therefor the coin is BU? </p><p><br /></p><p>What a huge load of hooey. Maybe I am just grouchy, but I actually judge a coin by the coin. I see what I see with my own eyes, and unless someone has some kind of proof, I assume wear is caused by circulation, as 99.9% of all wear is caused by. When I hear hoofbeats, I think of horses not spotted zebras.[/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