You wrote: so you are admitting i am right and you were wrong, good.
I reply: Laughing heartily, no, no, no, no, no. I stand by my first reply in the thread, that if the only two signatures I have to go on are the two you posted in the first post, then they call out to me that they are in different hands as indicated by the 5 differences I pointed out in about the 7 minutes it took me to put that reply together and draw it up. Perhaps if I use or consider other examples or exemplars, I might reach a different conclusion, who knows, that’s not the point of this discourse. The point is that the evidence you presented in the FIRST initial post did NOT prove conclusively that those two signatures are in the same hand, PERIOD. Might they be? Perhaps they might, but you didn’t give any of us enough info in that post to make that determination.
You wrote: i honestly didnt think
I reply: No, really? I would have never figured that out
You wrote: since they obviously are
I reply: Obviously, as you can easily tell by the 5 differences I pointed out in 4 letters, that they are obviously the same.
You wrote: after you posted, i did remember that third one was out there, and went and got it to prove my case. my case was proven, yours wasn't. I cant help it if you were wrong.
I reply: I’m not trying to make ANY case, except for that your first post that you felt was a major blockbuster, wasn’t. Your first post PROVED NOTHING. I’m simply imploring you to do a better job when you drop these blockbusters Not all of us are talented enough to be able to easily discern from the examples that you post what you want all of us to discern.
You wrote: of course you arent interested in any other exemples. It's devastating to your case.
I reply: No, I’m not interested because they weren’t included in the initial argument which is the one I chose to analyze. Subsequent examples are not devastating to my case, they only help to make the point that your post was incomplete and needed to include them in the first place so we could all see what you want us to see.
You wrote: this is why you refuted the obvious, you like them, and you defend the indefensible. that's your right. it was obvious they were both in the same hand, but you couldnt deal with it because you probably have a bunch of psa or jsa items.well good for you.
I reply: I didn’t refute the obvious. Again, from the two examples you posted in the initial post, it was NOT obvious. Sherlock, if forgers are going to attempt to pass off their work, most of the time, they are going to try and replicate traits of known signatures, thus, I would FULLY” EXPECT the two signatures to bear some resemblance. I very quickly pointed out that it’s not so obvious. Yes, I do have a bunch of PSA and JSA items in my collection, as well as Todd Mueller pieces, Koschal pieces, Richard Simon pieces (quick disclaimer, Richard, no slight intended by placing your name next to Koschal's), general ebay pieces, stuff I’ve gotten myself, and a whole host of others. Might even have a couple that have passed through your illustrious hands, who knows?
You wrote: If you like them and want to defend them, good, but don't put a technical comparison on what is an emotional issue for you.
I reply: Pot meet kettle. Don’t’ let technicalities get in the way of your crusade which is such an emotional issue for YOU. I’m not the one that types post after post after post after post after post after post (sorry, the keyboard must have been stuck for a moment, LOL) disparaging two companies that I don’t like.
You wrote: I am sorry it didn't work out for you.
I reply: I appreciate your sincere thoughts, but it’s working out just fine for me. This thread is going EXACTLY like how I anticipated it going. I was wrong on one thing though, I thought you’d be in to defend yourself a lot quicker than you were.
You wrote: For not studying Ruth's signature in depth, you did state your opinion as to whether or not they are signed in the same hand, do you retract that opinion?
I reply: You don’t have to study Ruth’s signature at all to be able to spot the 5 differences I pointed out quickly. There is no in depth analysis necessary to know that you didn’t present enough information in your first post, plain and simple. I do NOT retract my opinion that in your first post you did nothing to convince me that those two signatures are in the same hand, whether it be the hand of Babe Ruth, or the hand of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Did you do that later? Perhaps, perhaps not, that’s not the objective of my posts.
You wrote: If you haven't studied his signature in depth, then why all the fancy baselines, and lines here and there to try to prove they weren't signed in the same hand
I reply: Fancy? Seriously? It’s something I sketched up in a matter of a few minutes to show how ANYONE can quickly derive a different conclusion then the one offered by your premise.
You wrote: did you just think you could get away with it? It was obviously signed in the same hand, and I haven't seen anyone else try to refute it. I was a slam dunk.
I reply: Didn’t realize I was trying to get away with anything. I don’t own a Ruth and it doesn’t matter to me one iota if either one of those are authentic or not, whether they were signed by Ruth’s hands, Ruth’s feet, or Ruth’s mouth while his feet were in his hands. Be careful and don’t clang that dunk off the back rim, and don’t hit your head on that rim as it’s probably still sore from those two big trees.
Seriously, ALL I WANT IS THAT WHEN PEOPLE EXPRESS AN OPINION AS TO WHETHER SOMETHING IS GOOD, BAD, OR INDIFFERENT, STATE YOUR REASONS LIKE YOU DID IN THE FOLLOWUP POSTS, DON’T JUST POST TWO SIGS UP AND PRETEND IT’S OBVIOUS,
Help TEACH the rest of us.
If my little exercise here of wasting my time, does nothing more than get posters to use a different posting style to show us stuff, then it has been fruitful and time well spent