Quote:
Originally Posted by timn1
Brian,
These "two things we can't get around" make no sense to me--
1. Maybe you can't get past your opinion of the guy's honesty, but why you think anyone else should be so completely convinced by this I can't imagine. Not that I disbelieve the conversation took place, but all conversations are open to interpretation, and I see no reason to buy your account as the only way to read this guy.
2. I don't find it hard to believe at all that every known card 100 years later, or almost every one, could come from the same little hoard. I believe every M101-4 Burgess-Nash I've seen comes from one of two small groups.
I think Rhett's point is compelling: if it were so easy to create convincing fakes on old paper, surely someone would have done it with T206s long ago-
The nice thing is that we don't all have to agree on this, and it won't create any problem.
|
Tim,
I appreciate the input, but how can I get around the statement
"They are not real."?
Also, how can I get around that no other card has surfaced, other than a poor imitation Cobb, in a hobby in which there are nearly countless collectors.
This is one heck of a mental gymnastics act to go through to get around what actually happened. I am not trying to be stubborn, but I am not going to come up with revisionist history. The cards are fake.