Shoeless Joe Jackson Auto- Fake?

Snowman · #1 10-17-2021, 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

No one has refuted any of the arguments. They just disagreed.

Lol. Even the guy who made the arguments above agreed that I refuted several of them with the examples I gave. Clearly, you didn't even read my post.

rats60 · #2 10-17-2021, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snowman

Lol. Even the guy who made the arguments above agreed that I refuted several of them with the examples I gave. Clearly, you didn't even read my post.

Clearly you didn't read his post. He said only two of your were even well stated. Then he pointed out how he disagreed with them. You are entitled to your opinion just like everyone else is this thread. Acting like your opinion is the only correct one is not a good look.

Peter_Spaeth · #3 10-17-2021, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

Clearly you didn't read his post. He said only two of your were even well stated. Then he pointed out how he disagreed with them. You are entitled to your opinion just like everyone else is this thread. Acting like your opinion is the only correct one is not a good look.

There is a difference between acknowledging someone has made a worthy counterpoint, and admitting your argument has been refuted. As I read it, Thomas was doing the first, not the second, thing.

Lorewalker · #4 10-17-2021, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

Clearly you didn't read his post. He said only two of your were even well stated. Then he pointed out how he disagreed with them. You are entitled to your opinion just like everyone else is this thread. Acting like your opinion is the only correct one is not a good look.

I have told him so on several occasions now. Proves he is just here to argue/debate for the sake of arguing/debating.

Peter_Spaeth · #5 10-17-2021, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorewalker

I have told him so on several occasions now. Proves he is just here to argue/debate for the sake of arguing/debating.

He seems to have too much ego invested in these discussions. I disagree with many people frequently, rats60 and Mark17 and packs certainly, but we're just enjoying the give and take and not taking it personally or looking to win.

Snowman · #6 10-17-2021, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

He seems to have too much ego invested in these discussions. I disagree with many people frequently, rats60 and Mark17 and packs certainly, but we're just enjoying the give and take and not taking it personally or looking to win.

This has nothing to do with ego. I'm just an idiot. I'm basically allowing myself to continue in a conversation with a room full of crazy people who are pointing at a red stop sign and saying it's blue. Then my dumbass goes and pulls up examples of red and blue on a color chart and uploads photos of red stop signs to prove that the stop sign in question is red, not blue. Then the net54 asylum inamtes respond by saying "that's just your opinion".

If we can't all agree that I clearly disproved at least those 3 points listed above, then I'll just move on and be done with this thread because it has clearly become something other than an honest conversation on your end. But you should expect me to address you condescendingly in all future interactions if that is the position you wish to take.

Peter_Spaeth · #7 10-17-2021, 08:08 PM

This is the great self-deception of the narcissist -- he is the only intelligent person in the room and everyone else is stupid. Or crazy. Man, it must be lonely at the top.

Yes, you showed that for a couple of the apparent unique features of the 1911 signature but not all, there was another exemplar that appeared to have the same feature or close to it. Still, for each of those features, and I think I am correct about this, MOST of his known signatures did not have that feature. So the significance is still very much a matter of opinion.

Snowman · #8 10-17-2021, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Yes, you showed that for a couple of the apparent unique features of the 1911 signature but not all, there was another exemplar that appeared to have the same feature or close to it.

Thank you. This is the only thing I'm asking of people who are engaging in this conversation. All I ask is that people are honest and that they accept basic facts. If we can't have that, then there's no point in discussing. There are many other things we can have a difference of opinion on, and that's fine. But if we start saying things like "that's just your opinion" on whether or not a line goes up or down, then we're all just wasting our time here.

Lorewalker · #9 10-17-2021, 11:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

This is the great self-deception of the narcissist -- he is the only intelligent person in the room and everyone else is stupid. Or crazy. Man, it must be lonely at the top.

Yes, you showed that for a couple of the apparent unique features of the 1911 signature but not all, there was another exemplar that appeared to have the same feature or close to it. Still, for each of those features, and I think I am correct about this, MOST of his known signatures did not have that feature. So the significance is still very much a matter of opinion.

And at the end of the day, not sure why each of us cannot decide for ourselves if we feel good with the authentication or not If not then we should not get abused and described as crazy while the accuser is simply decides be is the only one being courageous. Talk about someone being full of themselves. WOW.

Snowman · #10 10-17-2021, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60

Clearly you didn't read his post. He said only two of your were even well stated. Then he pointed out how he disagreed with them. You are entitled to your opinion just like everyone else is this thread. Acting like your opinion is the only correct one is not a good look.

I'll clarify for you since apparently you're not getting this. Go read the post again, because clearly you didn't even read it. I wasn't offering an "opinion" in most of those counter arguments. He made numerous false claims. I simply posted examples to show that his claims were false. You don't get to have an "opinion" on whether or not a line goes up. The line either goes up or it doesn't. You don't get to have an opinion on whether or not there are wide gaps between the letters in the example photos I posted. The gaps are either present or they are not (and in these examples they are extremely clear and obvious gaps). You don't get to have an opinion on whether or not the tail of his J's sometimes go up, reaching near the top of the J. They either do or they don't. Each of these examples were presented by him as reasons for why the autograph is fake. I simply provided photographs of known examples that irrefutably disproved those claims. You don't get to say "oh that's just your opinion" or say "agree to disagree" or any such nonsense. I swear you guys will sit here and argue that red is blue and 2 is 4.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Shoeless Joe Jackson Cut Signature Auto Pristineauction.com	Burrguana	Baseball Memorabilia B/S/T	0	10-28-2012 04:00 PM
Fake Shoeless Joe Sporting News	Shoeless Moe	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	23	10-08-2012 10:38 PM
Fake Shoeless Joe - great BS story though	Shoeless Moe	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	4	01-08-2011 01:16 AM
Fake Shoeless Joe Rookie Card?	Shoeless Moe	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	14	11-16-2010 11:18 AM
Shoeless Joe Jackson E90-1 on E Bay	Archive	Ebay, Auction and other Venues Announcement- B/S/T	0	11-28-2007 10:09 AM