Milk Spots- Are They Such a Big Deal?

It sure sounds that way to the rest of us. This makes 38 of your last 40 post in this thread. And so far you have accomplished nada - with no proof of even that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

I did miss it.

 

Run along now, lest you turn permanently into a forum troll. You must have another installment of Guess the blah-blah-blah to attend to... and you're certainly not contributing to this thread in any meaningful, nor on-topic way. Your presence in this thread has done nothing but attempt to argue with someone you weren't even in conversation with. I was speaking to Doug, not you! Trying to quantify my posts to undermine my position is laughable. Funny that you didn't also share the number of times Doug replied in this thread and in so doing the number of times he failed to answer when asked for proof or how many times he tried to swap providing proof for something to do with knowledge. The burden remains upon Doug to answer or admit his err, which he owes this thread, and he well knows it. I'm sure he loves the dog-like attention you provide him with by filling in while he's snoozing. The only spots on coins your pack of stubborn old close-minded men seems to see on coins are the cataract stains blurring your rational thinking and principle to admit your wrongs and share knowledge by explaining your proof.

 

Wow krispy. No need to get nasty with folks that don't agree with you.
You should edit that last post.

 

One more thing krispy. I have not seen you offer any proof. Please do so.

 

Does anyone read? Or just complain that the overall quantity of posts to read is too much to read? How many times must I answer that I have nothing to prove. It's all upon Doug to explain his proof that the image I posted is not related to milk spots and further if he can expand on why milk spots are supposedly only circular in nature. I never declared I have proof one way or the other, I've just offered an image of what I consider may be related to the condition. It was enough of a condition on the coins I received, and knowing the negative affect the spots have on coins among collectors, to make me return them within the Mint's Return Policy period of time after receiving them. I've said it several times before, in this thread, my image may or may not be related, but there is not proof either way, and hence, Doug is wrong in his statement that my image is not a kind of milk spots or unrelated to them.

 

That is not about having anyone agree with me. I can care less if people agree, but when they are wrong I will tell them so. Twisting my words and trying to defame me might best get them served what they invited, a dose of blunt reality that they are not helping the situation and making it worse by their own distractions.

 

You ought to try listening to what the "people" are trying to tell you!

 

Right back at you. And you don't represent "the people", just a gang trying to bully your way around the playground.

 

Krispy, this is leading the subject from milkspots into a " mano a mano" argument that neither are compromising their belief. For the sake of the thread, please take this personal argument to PM, so that the subject ( procedural or chemical) can be continued, or start another separate thread in general discussion. Thanks Jim

 

Thanks Jim, nice try. But you are being far from an objective moderator. You call to me by name but fail to address all those responsible for interrupting this thread and my discussion with Doug that got this to this point. I addressed each one of them in a straight forward and civil manner explaining myself but everyone is trying to turn the proof argument on me, when the onus remains on Doug. That is all my contention is and what principal I stand up for in my argument. Sorry but by not directing this at others as well, you are as bad as they are by throwing fuel on a flame, chemically so to speak.

 

And Krispy you are far from being an objective poster. You did not start this thread, but you have certainly taken it over on a personal line rather than a coin line. You know the story, trash the coin, but not the person. No one is forcing you to change your mind, just move it off of the forum to PM or start a different thread as to why you are right, what is so tough about that?. Thanks. Jim

 

A moderator directly inferred I was unreasonable in character for asking him to share his proof and went on to claim I and others were idiots for it. Funny you don't or didn't think to read all his replies and equally address him when he trashed members and hasn't once discussed the coin. Surely HE knows the rules he's supposed to be a model for on this forum. And I don't have to be objective that's your duty and one that is showing to be lacking. I'm honestly just waiting for Doug to try and prove what he knows can't be proved or to admit that and his initial judgement isn't based on proof, just opinion, hence his err. If other people quote me and try to misrepresent what I said in this thread then you too should name them and advise they direct their comments to they wish to make towards me in PM. If you look at the posts they came at me with their biases. I did not seek them out, only replied in kind to explain my position on Dougs lack of proof to back his comment.

 

Since nobody really wants this discussion to be a duel that ends in blood stains on our coins why don't you simply show your photos (or maybe coins if you have any with such spots) to some dealer or other expert? Yes, I guess you could find experienced people here too, but "external" experts would be neutral with regard to this topic.

Christian

 

This started with my posting an image with Doug then flat out said 'was not' milk spots on my coin, and when pressed to explain how he knew this, he repeatedly evaded the question. If everyone and their 2¢ would simply step back and wait for Doug to provide his proof or admit he has none and was in err, then this point would be resolved. Simple as that.

 

Don't want to go through all of this again; Doug voiced an opinion based on knowledge, experience, whatever. You are free to accept or not accept it of course. Don't think that anybody here will try and "prove" that he is right or wrong - that is also why I wrote that, in my opinion, this has become fruitless, and that it would make more sense to show your images (or, better yet, coins) to others who have not been involved in this discussion.

Christian

 

I'm really loving the hard chemistry and physics stuff that's coming out in this thread. So, once it gets shut down due to all the poo-flinging, can we agree to put something about "chemistry" or "physics" in the title of the new thread, to make it easier to find?

 

I appreciated the fact that you stated in your post a matter of opinion. Doug didn't and rather maintained his knowledge was fact. Had he done so in the form of opinion it would make more sense on a topic which has little proof or definition.

 

But if a coin has a volatile residue, it makes it difficult to attain the degree of vacuum you need for EDS, doesn't it?