Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;medoraman, post: 6487004, member: 26302&quot;]I would hope you do not feel welcome here. The one thing I would say is we deal with a lot of issues not definitely solvable here. I have disagreed with others here quite often, which is fine since I know it cannot be proven. I say my peace, and if others disagree I let them. A thread on CoinTalk will never be a &quot;definitive&quot; answer, even published works are never really &quot;definitive&quot;. Maybe your troubles here is your desire to be viewed as definitive, it cannot happen. I know a little more about some subjects than others, but always allow others can fairly disagree.</p><p><br /></p><p>I thought about these issues for quite a while, whether I believe they are the Great Sphinx. I know I can never prove it. I know the Great Sphinx was not as popular in antiquity as today for some reason, but still known. Given it was known, I cannot fathom why the few issues showing an unknown Egyptian Sphinx would reference an unknown tiny one when at least the Egyptians for which these coins were made were aware there was a &quot;Great&quot; one. Therefore, I am not too interested in semantics others writers used to describe it, I was comfortable it was referencing the &quot;Great&quot; one. Your post about authors wording is simply not going to change my mind, since it is not addressing MY argument why I believe it to be true.</p><p><br /></p><p>TLDR: Many educated collectors will always have honest disagreements and no sense getting upset about it. I love your knowledge sir, and hope you say, but maybe think about what I wrote.[/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