1937 Buffalo Nickel... Mint Error, Planchet flaw, Both of the above, Or PMD? 2 2

[Henri Charriere]

5 hours ago, ldhair said:

Not many are going to read your long post.

 

Time is better spent with proof of how an error can happen in the minting process. Proof is the only thing that will bring people over to the way you see things. 

There are terms and conditions to the use of this site, but to the presumably open-minded members who have blocked others, that is not good enough.

They, claiming to speak for millions, set time limits. It never occurs to them that there are those who eagerly look forward to reading newspapers, journals, books -- even threads, from beginning to end, and enjoy doing so.

Even more amusing are those who lay down the gauntlet, with the aid of like-minded confederates who insist on their own tailor-made terms of engagement.  If you decline (refuse, in their mind) they don't just block you, they broadcast it to the four corners of the world. 

The above member who purportedly blocked me, an honor I do not believe I have worked hard enough to deserve, insists that our beloved Dr. Hill provide "proof."  Not likelihood, not probability, not reasonable suspicion, not preponderance of the evidence not beyond a reasonable doubt, but "proof," something no U.S. court of law I am aware of, demands.

I will call these non-negotiable demands what they truly are: pure rubbish.  Again, Prof. Hill, write at length to your heart's content and let the chips fall where they may.  I for one am all ears.

Postscript:  my heartfelt thanks to all thirty-seven blockers who made this comment possible.

[Just Bob]

2 hours ago, Quintus Arrius said:

 

Postscript:  my heartfelt thanks to all thirty-seven blockers who made this comment possible.

I don't think they heard you.

[Moxie15]

thirty-seven? Hell why go through all the effort?  If I find what you write to be inane I just stop reading it. Easy.

[physics-fan3.14]

16 hours ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

C'mon physics-fan, don't sugar-coat it. What do you *really* think?

I really think you're tedious. And Boring. And probably an alt for Quintus Arrius, given your similarly long-winded and pointless rambling posts. 

16 hours ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

I'm no professor, btw,

 

Usually people who name themselves "Prof" are professors. I see I am clearly in error in overestimating your reputability and intelligence. 

16 hours ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

but you don't seem to have the wherewithal to respond directly about this nickel.

 

With all of your grandiosity, you appear to have forgotten how to read. If you'll check back, there have been very few posts of substance in this thread, but Moxie and I discussed the idea of post mint damage. I know, it got lost in all of your ramblings. 

16 hours ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

No, you hoped only to somehow show yourself as superior, but you failed, big-time.

 

Yeah... I don't really have the time or desire to deal with you either. You'll probably continue to rant against me because you're a troll, but I'm going to put you on my ignore list and never have to suffer through your delirium again. I do hope everyone else here does the same. 

[Henri Charriere]

3 hours ago, Just Bob said:

I don't think they heard you.

Actually, they have. Indirectly. (And it matters little if some haven't.)  My wife calls me a vagabond for the oddest of reasons: because I fold up my daily paper, and place it in my back pocket. I thought a troll was a mythical ogre from a fairy tale who lived under a bridge. You live and learn.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Quintus Arrius
Correct misspelling

[Henri Charriere]

21 hours ago, Moxie15 said:

thirty-seven? Hell why go through all the effort?  If I find what you write to be inane I just stop reading it. Easy.

Not everyone is capable of exercising the discipline and displaying the maturity you do.

Edited October 3, 2020 by Quintus Arrius
Original word choice.

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/1/2020 at 9:04 PM, Conder101 said:

You've never seen two (or more) coins stuck together?

Of course, but if they were simply stuck together the edge of the coin and the other side would show indications of the chemical damage. 

Also, the area at far left, at the rim out in front of the bison's face, is in places a very thin 'shelf'. The corner of a razor blade could slip under it at a few places. 

It appears that a large piece of the lamination came free all at once, with smaller bits and pieces coming loose in the area I just described, as the coin circulated.

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 9/28/2020 at 3:47 PM, Moxie15 said:

Have you had a TPG look at this?

No, none of the coins I've posted have been in to either NGC or PCGS, (the only two I use.)

I will probably send the 1903 tapered planchet Indian cent, the 1911 Lincoln, and my unstruck Large cent planchet in for verification/authentication, for a start.

Not sure yet which of the two TPG's I'll send them to.

[ldhair]

Something pushed the metal around on this nickel. Whatever it was, damaged both sides of the coin at the same time.

Note how the coin has a strong upset rim but it's almost gone in the damaged areas. It was pushed /scraped away. 

I can't think of a way this could happen in the minting process. I can see how a feeding finger could damage one side of the coin but not both. 

There must have been a hundred types of counting and rolling machines used over the years. One of them probably caused the damage.

With many coins, it's impossible to be sure what caused the damage but you just know that it's damage. 

[Henri Charriere]

18 hours ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

I will probably send the 1903 tapered planchet Indian cent, the 1911 Lincoln, and my unstruck Large cent planchet in for verification/authentication, for a start.

What has happened to coin collecting as an enjoyable pastime?  Is there no one proficient in the art, if not science -- bolstered by the oft-touted 150 years of experience --looking on, who is unable to cite with a reasonable degree of near-ceritude as to what the examples depicted -- surely less than unique, one-of-kind anomalies are, and worthy of being sent in for further examination?

No one has ever seen anything like these?  Is that what you would have members of a major Forum believe?

This is not unlike the scene in the 1983 movie where Eddie Murphy is taken into custody inside an exclusive private club, yells out, "Is there a lawyer in the house?" and is met with barely suppressed coughing amid a thinning crowd.

[Insider]

On 10/3/2020 at 7:54 PM, ProfHaroldHill said:

 

Please link to the CU discussion about this nickel.  So far, none of the explanations of PMD make any sense to ,me.

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/2/2020 at 4:58 AM, ldhair said:

Not many are going to read your long post. Anything of value to the topic is lost. It's cool that you are a genius but that has nothing to do with the coin. Time is better spent with proof of how an error can happen in the minting process. Proof is the only thing that will bring people over to the way you see things. 

Not many, perhaps, but those who read the childish post by physics fan are due a note by me in reply.

That whole genius business is a blessing and a curse. 

[ProfHaroldHill]

5 hours ago, Insider said:

Please link to the CU discussion about this nickel.  So far, none of the explanations of PMD make any sense to ,me.

It might be the one that @Moxie15 linked to, but there was no discussion about the nickel, as I recall.

It wasn't my thread, so rather than disagree with Fred Weinberg after his post, I let diplomacy rule the day.

I had also actually told someone else I'd accept his, FWs, opinion, sure that he would say that he would want to see it in person, (in which case I would have sent it in.)  Probably would have been poor form to counter his brief post in reply.

 

 

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/4/2020 at 11:30 AM, Quintus Arrius said:

What has happened to coin collecting as an enjoyable pastime?  Is there no one proficient in the art, if not science -- bolstered by the oft-touted 150 years of experience --looking on, who is unable to cite with a reasonable degree of near-ceritude as to what the examples depicted -- surely less than unique, one-of-kind anomalies are, and worthy of being sent in for further examination?

No one has ever seen anything like these?  Is that what you would have members of a major Forum believe?

This is not unlike the scene in the 1983 movie where Eddie Murphy is taken into custody inside an exclusive private club, yells out, "Is there a lawyer in the house?" and is met with barely suppressed coughing amid a thinning crowd.

Money happened to the hobby. It's never been the same since then.

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/4/2020 at 10:50 AM, ldhair said:

Something pushed the metal around on this nickel. Whatever it was, damaged both sides of the coin at the same time.

Note how the coin has a strong upset rim but it's almost gone in the damaged areas. It was pushed /scraped away. 

I can't think of a way this could happen in the minting process. I can see how a feeding finger could damage one side of the coin but not both. 

There must have been a hundred types of counting and rolling machines used over the years. One of them probably caused the damage.

With many coins, it's impossible to be sure what caused the damage but you just know that it's damage. 

The metal is actually gone, it wasn't moved around on the surface. 

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 9/29/2020 at 11:50 AM, ProfHaroldHill said:

Look very carefully at LIBERTY before speculating. I'll get a different angle image later and add it.

At the area where the 'line' meets the rim, the metal creates a shelf where the  line crosses the rim. You could insert a very thin blade between the two layers of metal.

The top portion of LIBERTY is perfectly formed but is similar to FIVE CENTS on the reverse, in that it is set below the plane of the original surface. 

[Insider]

1 hour ago, ProfHaroldHill said:

It might be the one that @Moxie15 linked to, but there was no discussion about the nickel, as I recall.

It wasn't my thread, so rather than disagree with Fred Weinberg after his post, I let diplomacy rule the day.

I had also actually told someone else I'd accept his, FWs, opinion, sure that he would say that he would want to see it in person, (in which case I would have sent it in.)  Probably would have been poor form to counter his brief post in reply.

 

 

 

Then why are members saying Fred called it PMD and did not comment further.  Guess I'm just confused.  Won't be the first time.

Edited October 6, 2020 by Insider

[ProfHaroldHill]

4 hours ago, Insider said:

Then why are members saying Fred called it PMD and did not comment further.  Guess I'm just confused.  Won't be the first time.

FW did comment 'PMD', some time after I had posted it to the thread, but there was no further discussion about the coin itself, after that, and FW didn't comment any further.

My initial thoughts on the coin were dismissed by the board regulars, after FW posted his one-word comment, ("'PMD'")  When I posted another odd coin, (the 1902 Indian Cent we discussed in the other thread,) no one offered any opinions. 

[Insider]

So what is the link to your post on CU?  What was the title of your post so I can search.  When a coin is damaged, the surfaces don't look like the rest of the coin UNLESS all the surfaces have been altered.  Your nickel looks natural to me.

[VKurtB]

This is going to sound snarky, but it isn't. I'm completely serious. When Fred Weinberg has spoken about a coin, little else remains to be said. He is THE error expert of them all. Full stop.

 

But our OP needn't despair. Having an "error" that isn't one puts him in extremely numerous company, particularly on the Internet.

Edited October 6, 2020 by VKurtB

[VKurtB]

On 9/26/2020 at 6:24 PM, ProfHaroldHill said:

. If I could afford the luxury, I would send it to PCGS and request a detailed analysis. I can't.

What on earth makes you think you'd get anything even remotely like a "detailed analysis" from PCGS??? I'd never expect anything of the sort. PMD, Damage, whatever, all the same. They aren't going to wax poetic over it. Is anybody else getting a familiar vibe from our OP, like the dude with the "matte 1993 dime"?

Edited October 6, 2020 by VKurtB

[Insider]

1 hour ago, VKurtB said:

This is going to sound snarky, but it isn't. I'm completely serious. When Fred Weinberg has spoken about a coin, little else remains to be said. He is THE error expert of them all. Full stop.

 

But our OP needn't despair. Having an "error" that isn't one puts him in extremely numerous company, particularly on the Internet.

Not snarky at all, just very uninformed:  You show me one Internationally recognized authentication "Expert" who has never been proven to be incorrect.  You cannot.   

PS I will not comment on anyone you name either that's their business.  

[Henri Charriere]

3 hours ago, VKurtB said:

What on earth makes you think you'd get anything even remotely like a "detailed analysis" from PCGS??? I'd never expect anything of the sort. PMD, Damage, whatever, all the same. They aren't going to wax poetic over it. Is anybody else getting a familiar vibe from our OP, like the dude with the "matte 1993 dime"?

There is a significant (monumental) difference between the urgent insistence of a RichieRich2020-type bordering on hysteria and that of the cool, calm and collected approach of Prof. Hill who notably  informed readers he would get around to displaying the reverse side of the nickel featuring the bison, as one viewer requested, when he was so disposed!  How does one spell chutzpah? 😉

In the former, the owner, rendered opinions from some of the most learned authorities on the subject in the land, declined to accept their assessments; in the latter, my gut feeling as an accomplished troll who's jousted here with many of the principals involved, strongly suggests the good Prof. has the answer to the question he seeks but like a cat playing with a mouse, or mice, enjoys a game of chess with those whose minds display a full range of the specific skill sets needed to bring the chase to a fulfilling conclusion.

It's innocent inquiries such as these that inadvertently separate the contenders, i.e., the men of substance and honor, from what the author William S. Burroughs (deceased) derisively dismissed as the "set-up" man:  "I've been watching you.  You're the man I need for this set-up.  Now listen. . ." 

[The foregoing post is dedicated to the likes of "pi-guy," a/k/a physics-fan3.14 and his 36 like-minded moderator--wannabees.] 

[ldhair]

21 hours ago, Insider said:

So what is the link to your post on CU?  What was the title of your post so I can search.  When a coin is damaged, the surfaces don't look like the rest of the coin UNLESS all the surfaces have been altered.  Your nickel looks natural to me.

Come on Skip. Tell us more. What do you think caused the looks of the coin? 

[Insider]

4 hours ago, ldhair said:

Come on Skip. Tell us more. What do you think caused the looks of the coin? 

I don't know yet.  I have stated that I PERSONALLY see no PMD in the coin's image.  I also respect Fred's PERSONAL opinion.  Perhaps the owner will send it in.

Edited October 7, 2020 by Insider

[Moxie15]

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/860931/an-example-of-a-incomplete-clip-planchet-mint-error

 

@Insider  the coin is posted in this thread, Fred calls it PMD and Captain Hennaway does too as I recall, along with a couple other members gave some reason before Fred  and Capt. spoke up

[Insider]

1 hour ago, Moxie15 said:

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/860931/an-example-of-a-incomplete-clip-planchet-mint-error

 

@Insider  the coin is posted in this thread, Fred calls it PMD and Captain Hennaway does too as I recall, along with a couple other members gave some reason before Fred  and Capt. spoke up

Thanks, I'll read ALL of it later.  The coin IS NOT an incomplete clip.  That's for sure!

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/7/2020 at 11:07 AM, Insider said:

Thanks, I'll read ALL of it later.  The coin IS NOT an incomplete clip.  That's for sure!

Eight years ago when I first learned of incomplete clips, (via that thread,) it seemed to perhaps explain why the missing lamination had broken away along a curved line. If the planchet had been the product of a flawed blanking process, it would explain why the edge of the missing piece was curved. Placing another nickel on top of the reverse, the rough circular edge matches the overlayed nickel's edge. The breakaway stays within the area that could be expected to break away, if the underlying fault plane had been previously severed by the punch's first attempt at making a blank.

But the obverse 'curved line', though beginning where it should if it were an IC planchet, soon parts ways with the line on the reverse, straying toward parallelism with its host's own edge and then fading as it enters the area of the hair. For my 2012 'theory', (an inspiration right after I understood the IC planchet phenom, just before my post that day,) ...of its being an IC planchet to pass muster, the deviation in the curved line on the obverse, and it's disappearance, both have to be explained, simply and reasonably. While it could be suggested that the depth of the die in the hair area is deep enough to have allowed such metal flow as would eliminate the 'line' from the original flaw, there is too much deviation in the curvature of the line, to explain it away as the movement of metal during the moment of striking.

This isn't news to you, Insider, I know, but I wanted to explain my thinking both originally, and then as I realized the first idea was most likely wrong.

Lacking a sufficient defense, my original idea had to be dramatically altered or eliminated. I had nothing more.

But the tone and mood over at CU PCGS US Coins forum was/is such that going back to the CU board later on, for further discussion, would likely have borne no fruit. One very nice thing about that thread was the fact I was thereafter able to quite possibly explain what happened to my 1911-P Lincoln Cent, (shown in another thread.)

Edited October 8, 2020 by ProfHaroldHill
2008 corrected to 2012

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/7/2020 at 5:34 AM, ldhair said:

Come on Skip. Tell us more. What do you think caused the looks of the coin? 

Let him examine it in person first.

He has offered to let me send it in for 'research and study', and I have accepted the opportunity afforded by that gracious offer.

 

[ProfHaroldHill]

On 10/6/2020 at 9:17 AM, VKurtB said:

What on earth makes you think you'd get anything even remotely like a "detailed analysis" from PCGS??? I'd never expect anything of the sort. PMD, Damage, whatever, all the same. They aren't going to wax poetic over it. Is anybody else getting a familiar vibe from our OP, like the dude with the "matte 1993 dime"?

To answer the question you directed to me, I would say it was the fact that I once spent almost ten minutes on the phone with PCGS, (two different people, one a grader,) regarding a gold coin that I had just received back from them.

Granted, that was back in the early 1990's and maybe that has changed. Still, for some matters a detailed analysis need only be a few sentences.