Best Of

Very nice photos and a neat way to present them.

Those are really great pictures, nice set of toners!

@messydesk must have a nice setup.
The image quality is perfect.
Nice coins btw.

@errormaven said:
Ex cathedra arguments (arguments from authority) are as invalid in numismatics as they are in science. The only thing that matters is the quality of the evidence and the logical consistency of the argument that ties that evidence together. In this case, the evidence is wanting.

That is beside the point. It's between PCGS, GC, and the coin owner. It's a business decision.

As for science and numismatics, ex cathedral arguments exist and have their place. Otherwise, controversies would persist forever. The entire existence of PCGS is based on the value of ex cathedra opinions.

I assume you want both evolution and intelligent design taught because you can't conclusively disprove intelligent design?

It's a toned proof coin. Better than spending money, but not a lot of value.

"I wonder if there is a specific category of errors to which this coin belongs, given that it represents a transitional error involving an incorrect planchet weight."

I wouldn't know.

I made an uneducated statement/opinion when I said "not" above. So I could be wrong.

What's interesting is the strange look with the reverse. Almost as if there was some environmental or chemical deterioration involved, thus lowering the weight?

@errormaven / Mike Diamond, any thoughts on this one?

Pass
Exceed
Pass

A lamination error in coins refers to a defect where the surface of a coin cracks and flakes due to impurities or contaminants in the metal alloy. This can occur when foreign bodies or impurities are trapped inside the metal during the production process, leading to the peeling away of the coin's surface layer. Essentially, it is a planchet error that affects the integrity of the coin's surface.