Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;JCro57, post: 4638269, member: 92083&quot;]I have ducked out the discussion because you are flat out wrong and I have not learned a single thing from you about this discussion.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would advise you, as a friend, to stick to non-errors. I am curious as to why someone -who even admits he really doesn&#039;t know errors all that well - continues to belabor points that are contrary to scientific analysis.</p><p><br /></p><p>In addition, and what is most absurd, is a persistent effort to deny and exclude comparisons of photos of similar coins, and then engages in infantile hissy-fits at the mere suggestion to examine them.</p><p><br /></p><p>Show me any serious scientist who insists comparative examples must be ignored.</p><p><br /></p><p>It is at the point where I can no longer take you seriously, especially seeing that so many damaged coins have been certified by ICG as genuine errors. In particular, brockages that are unquestionably vise jobs and chemically-altered cents missing copper plating.</p><p><br /></p><p>If you want help at ICG, which is sorely needed, please consider my offer.[/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