Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;krispy, post: 2132462, member: 19065&quot;]Thing is, I didn&#039;t say I know what is or isn&#039;t a milk spot and remain open to their being more to them than merely well defined circular spots that fell in the fields somehow. Doug however did claim my image wasn&#039;t milk spots but has no proof or way of educating us about how he knows and how that his knowledge proves it. I am open to being wrong, that the image of spots I provided were not milk spots or related to them in some way. That&#039;s because I know this condition is unresolved, and with so little proven about them, do not so narrowly define them by the kind of shape they take, and I don&#039;t just think any willy-nilly white spot is a milk spot as Doug implied I had. Doug was asked to prove why he can tell from a photo and he hasn&#039;t. Why? He can&#039;t. But he&#039;s got a powerful reputation on this forum that most bow down to and he has a sneaky way of getting off topic and turning the tables on others who challenge him as he slips away from being held to his own faults and errors. </p><p><br /></p><p>I appreciate how you interpreted the images I posted and that could be from the image quality itself, however I would disagree with you about the metal flow theory on the coins I had, studied, photographed and ultimately returned to the Mint. The condition on the coins I had affected more than one coin, and not in the same places, and was a more liquid or aqueous like reticulated-type mark on the surface and not the result of the composition blend or flow. Maybe I can&#039;t prove that either, but I was the one who experienced this example more closely than anyone refuting my arguments here as well.[/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