capetriangle wrote:Abed, mozzerb, others
Both Expert Committees call the item faked. Sure there are slight differences in opinion as to how this fakery was achieved which I referred to as "tiniest differences." However, the similarities are enormous and fundamental.
Richard Debney
Whatever you are smoking, it must be good stuff.
To call these jackass views below, as having the
"tiniest differences" seems to prove how little you appear to really know about stamps.
The RPS said the latter 7s - all cut from other stamps had all been
PASTED onto the cover -- in all 5 or 6 positions.
As I have typed many times, a 10 year old could have refuted that was the case, and surely goes down as one of the more amateur and foolhardy opinions ever issued by them.
A human fingernail could have detected that - had it occurred, much less a rudimentary check with a UV lamp.
You and the PF .... knowing
full well the verdict of the RPS, (as you have admitted in writing) issued your nearly as amateur and foolhardy an opinion, that the numbers have all been
painted in - after the paper had been hacked or abraded away, which I suspect is the main reason you are not allowed to sit on the PF Expert Committee going forward. It is pure Fantasyland stuff - like the RPS view.
Anyone capable of making such an absurd and embarrassing boo boo - and oddly very publicly owing up to it, and defending it to the hilt in the face of a barrage of
SCIENCE proving it was nonsense, does not deserve to be given the chance to mis-describe any future submissions from anyone - IMHO.
Many may believe the Philatelic Foundation appears to have acted most widely by removing your right to sit on their "Expert" Committee, before more damage is done to their reputation by such actions.
To style these as
"tiniest differences" is like saying the difference in appearance between a 1d Black and a £5 Orange is "tiny".
To claim these 2 erroneous "Certificates" which the reasons for the alleged faking show
"the similarities are enormous" is philatelic ignorance of the highest order -- they are WORLDS apart.
I would not mind betting collectors who have had negative PF Certificates issued with you on the Committee, might be lining up for re-review, and compensation where applicable. And the wider this thread is read, the more of them there will be.
All your posts are it seems squarely aimed at covering your rear end, and seeing you are incapable of adding
a single FACT to back them up, have failed that test miserably I'd say.
To now make even more idiotic comments that the 2 certs have
"similarities(that are) are enormous" digs your reputation hole even deeper.
You have been asked several times to
"Put up or shut up" - and you refuse to do either.
Both "Certificates" are absurd and wrong in my view, but are MILES apart in stating
how the the alleged faking allegedly took place ... faking which we all know Science
cannot see in any way.
Surely only a Philatelic Fool would say that?