When I said in person I mean in person for I will not send out any of my coins to ones I don't know or not being able to see almost like if I did that I'd be truly fooled again or possibly, that's right for I refused to send in my 2020 W Quarters and with good reason.
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
I see you've made your profile private so that others can't go back and read your other ridiculous threads. So much for transparency and openness.
It wasn't a coincidence that you started this latest nonsense on a weekend. Hopefully the moderators will shut this insanity down permanently. Then you can focus all your energies on the new website you claim to be building (will it have padded walls)?
@SlickCoins said:
The pics I was pending approval on is, ......
You think PCGS has the time or desire to censor you!
And you think it's all a major plot against you between the members here and the staff at PCGS.
I'm sure you also think the Earth is flat.
It is a known glitch on the forum with photo loading problems.
Try clearing your browser & cookies.
If that doesn't work hit the preview button and then hit the post button.
If you didn't get yourself all worked into a frenzy and just asked "why can't I upload photos" you would know that no one is conspiring against you.
We didn't take your marbles away, you lost them all on your own.
@SlickCoins said:
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
Slick, you are aware that an XRF result tells only metal content not age correct? For example a genuine large cent will read something like 95% Copper, not 95% copper from 1793. An XRF is not effective showing genuine versus counterfeit/replica/fake. It would be effective showing if a copy was lead versus copper, but not if the replica is made from copper.
Just also, seems like you are stuck on this. PCGS, or any other grading service) does not grade coins HIGHER based on what you spend grading in the different tiers. You get the exact same eyes and opinions for the economy submission as you would for the walkthrough submission. The only difference is speed returned to you. How effective would coin grading be if you could just pay for a higher grade? I think you need to continue your research on PCGS and their services.
Not sure why I’m bothering, but I figured you may want to understand these basic facts first. Good luck with research!
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
For those who are curious what Slick is babbling about. Here is his image of a modern (and poorly made) copy of a 1793 Large Cent. It was purchased off eBay from a replica coin seller overseas, who had at the time many others available.
Slick, nobody here has blocked your ability to post images or words. You just are not using forum correctly. Ah, another area to research for you!
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
@SlickCoins said:
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
Slick, you are aware that an XRF result tells only metal content not age correct? For example a genuine large cent will read something like 95% Copper, not 95% copper from 1793. An XRF is not effective showing genuine versus counterfeit/replica/fake. It would be effective showing if a copy was lead versus copper, but not if the replica is made from copper.
Just also, seems like you are stuck on this. PCGS, or any other grading service) does not grade coins HIGHER based on what you spend grading in the different tiers. You get the exact same eyes and opinions for the economy submission as you would for the walkthrough submission. The only difference is speed returned to you. How effective would coin grading be if you could just pay for a higher grade? I think you need to continue your research on PCGS and their services.
Not sure why I’m bothering, but I figured you may want to understand these basic facts first. Good luck with research!
Actually, trace metals in the XRF analysis could show that the planchets had the same source. This has been used for things like branch mint gold.
@SlickCoins said:
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
Slick, you are aware that an XRF result tells only metal content not age correct? For example a genuine large cent will read something like 95% Copper, not 95% copper from 1793. An XRF is not effective showing genuine versus counterfeit/replica/fake. It would be effective showing if a copy was lead versus copper, but not if the replica is made from copper.
Just also, seems like you are stuck on this. PCGS, or any other grading service) does not grade coins HIGHER based on what you spend grading in the different tiers. You get the exact same eyes and opinions for the economy submission as you would for the walkthrough submission. The only difference is speed returned to you. How effective would coin grading be if you could just pay for a higher grade? I think you need to continue your research on PCGS and their services.
Not sure why I’m bothering, but I figured you may want to understand these basic facts first. Good luck with research!
Actually, trace metals in the XRF analysis could show that the planchets had the same source. This has been used for things like branch mint gold.
Well, that is something that has been studied with foreign planchets with regards to trace metals indicating what source/mine were producing them. While there are major disagreements on the results and what they actually tell, this is really not something that can be effectively used for US planchet stock during 1793. Much copper coinage circulating in the 1780s in the US was turned in for taxes or other uses and then melted for other use as the coins had been so badly devalued by 1790-92. Matter fact, the states ran advertisements in newspapers asking the public to turn in their old copper coins. There are federal cents struck over Talbot Allum Lee pieces, etc. If one were to know the specific sources of exactly what each coin was made from, you could maybe extrapolate something from that, but of course, this was not the case so XRF info will not lead to much discovery in that regard.
Also, worth noting is the inconsistencies in individual results using XRF. I am aware of a coin that was tested at least 6 times by 6 different people, all results were quite different with regards to metal percentages below 5%. Coin surface contamination from either contact with the ground or other contamination could drastically alter the results with trace metal percentages. Just worth a thought.
At the end of the day, XRF is not necessarily an effective tool in researching a counterfeit versus an authentic coin of this era. And believe me, it has been tried by some very talented and hopeful numismatists, none of which have been able to draw a conclusion to my knowledge from any coinage 1700s in America. And they have been using data compiled for the last 30 years!
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
@SlickCoins said:
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
Slick, you are aware that an XRF result tells only metal content not age correct? For example a genuine large cent will read something like 95% Copper, not 95% copper from 1793. An XRF is not effective showing genuine versus counterfeit/replica/fake. It would be effective showing if a copy was lead versus copper, but not if the replica is made from copper.
Just also, seems like you are stuck on this. PCGS, or any other grading service) does not grade coins HIGHER based on what you spend grading in the different tiers. You get the exact same eyes and opinions for the economy submission as you would for the walkthrough submission. The only difference is speed returned to you. How effective would coin grading be if you could just pay for a higher grade? I think you need to continue your research on PCGS and their services.
Not sure why I’m bothering, but I figured you may want to understand these basic facts first. Good luck with research!
Actually, trace metals in the XRF analysis could show that the planchets had the same source. This has been used for things like branch mint gold.
Well, that is something that has been studied with foreign planchets with regards to trace metals indicating what source/mine were producing them. While there are major disagreements on the results and what they actually tell, this is really not something that can be effectively used for US planchet stock during 1793. Much copper coinage circulating in the 1780s in the US was turned in for taxes or other uses and then melted for other use as the coins had been so badly devalued by 1790-92. Matter fact, the states ran advertisements in newspapers asking the public to turn in their old copper coins. There are federal cents struck over Talbot Allum Lee pieces, etc. If one were to know the specific sources of exactly what each coin was made from, you could maybe extrapolate something from that, but of course, this was not the case so XRF info will not lead to much discovery in that regard.
Also, worth noting is the inconsistencies in individual results using XRF. I am aware of a coin that was tested at least 6 times by 6 different people, all results were quite different with regards to metal percentages below 5%. Coin surface contamination from either contact with the ground or other contamination could drastically alter the results with trace metal percentages. Just worth a thought.
At the end of the day, XRF is not necessarily an effective tool in researching a counterfeit versus an authentic coin of this era. And believe me, it has been tried by some very talented and hopeful numismatists, none of which have been able to draw a conclusion to my knowledge from any coinage 1700s in America. And they have been using data compiled for the last 30 years!
Hey! This is not the proper place for informative and educational conversations!!!
Well now new England I must triumph over that, jbk there is nothing there unless you go back through the reactions but I have opened it and I'm giving my email
First off that was a great reply New England, so I bet you know when the zinc recipe was let out to the public in Germany, yes when that coin slid out of my package I was bummed and kinda pissed off so I compared the dmg to what I bought on eBay for $31 plus shipping $7 = $38 of extreme fun so as bummed as I thought the edges were going to be super sharp so I tried to cut threw the 2x2 flip of school one, if I had to guess 20years old, it failed so I'd like to point out to everyone the smudge under Liberty is 100% my fault.
On this coin I beg to differ for it is 35% zinc give or take and I've pointed out 1795 plain edge large cents the have gouges and it is showing metal underneath
Anyways, so I took this coin to NGC and let the fun begin, so back then I was so new it was pretty funny and we started the counterfeit tests and then we got to the raised, well I didn't know what it was and hoopster was all over me so I told him I'd get better rim shots lol
Badaboomcha it he says it best, so I googled it sure enough I was super wrong, right about now since I was using my camera and a microscope camera I was noticing the pictures didn't match and there was the one I bought under microscope zoom lens
@SlickCoins said:
On this coin I beg to differ for it is 35% zinc give or take and I've pointed out 1795 plain edge large cents the have gouges and it is showing metal underneath
Well Slick, if you are hopeful to see if a 1795 plain edge large cent is 35% zinc, and I guess you tested your coin and it is 35% zinc as well, you are in for some pretty big discrepancies and mysteries left to explain.
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
I see the marks that are on mine by the way so I raced here with my zoomed lens pictures yes that's right the same coin posted 2 professional coin places same time, in fact here is where I got the universal weakness both days fake and I can only imagine cause it's super sweet condition.
Still super bummed for this coin in hand was not the one I order but it was for the damage was spot on, so I don't know how I clicked and it was going nowhere for the dull face was driving away my push to find out more, so I started Google and what's safe on copper, being an ex painter of the Vail valley I knew about goof off so I googled it and low and behold collector's universe had a post right there, I knew for the amount of responses it was a locked thread I read it, locked it in and g2g I was gone which I did mention it but they had already found it so I dipped it in goof off, well then instantly my crystal clear goof off was so cloudy black the only way I knew where it was cause it's a glass bowl,,,
I was thinking now I've done it LMAO
Off topic and jbk did you mean my copper 43 cent poorly repaired came back a 42 hmm the die markers is that's what we would call the lumps in the top of the 3 how did it predate one year and end up on this 2?
1942 we had no problems with any weakness but yet from where the gap begins and yes in one of my examples I used the white pencil to make it where I would need it to do this type of repairs, the 2 I can make the bottom look like it has not been struck,,,, is this what you wanted JBK
Slick, maybe to help save you some time and energy, here is an antiqued surface of your copy making it appear to have been lightly circulated and appear aged. Your copy can be found from many different sources overseas.
New England Rarities...Dealer In Colonial Coinage and Americana
Yep Lance started a great thread and we said the same exact things and it was the fuel I needed, for I was off to find a match especially after finding the broken 1943 I felt I'm on a roll
Well I searched and search and searched I found the hub and die yes but not the reason why, until I checked my own coins and wow I've got it lol
On the mule cent I tracked it down from what I call flow lines for 1958 the had a bunch but never in the same direction, flow lines under Liberty behind the neck, along with the date starting from the base.
Totally like being an investigator type 😁
Thanks again
Eric
The quarter S mark at the end of quarter then go to the LL of dollar the king mark hmm looks like an S under the D not to mention to the left to the left, to the right to the right, what's that bottom of the branch is that a micro S, then go to pluribus unum in the bottom of the curve in the P and top of the U in Unum
Question on the quarter two beaks? Two left toes and the pillar the bird is on bottom left, is this doubling?
So I've been hunting 1793 for a like example but I'm floored and even almost said their coin was fake, they are everywhere just drawing a circle and I'm going right there them
Comments
When I said in person I mean in person for I will not send out any of my coins to ones I don't know or not being able to see almost like if I did that I'd be truly fooled again or possibly, that's right for I refused to send in my 2020 W Quarters and with good reason.
I have a feeling the smoking gun evidence is incoming soon for all it needs is an xrf on a 1795 plain edge large cent, hmm 🤔 I wonder the defense when it matches verbatim
Then I'll ask you about my planchette research
Not that I'd want a job at pcgs, just what is the deal with the state of Colorado I mean not hiring from only one of 50 states?
I see you've made your profile private so that others can't go back and read your other ridiculous threads. So much for transparency and openness.
It wasn't a coincidence that you started this latest nonsense on a weekend. Hopefully the moderators will shut this insanity down permanently. Then you can focus all your energies on the new website you claim to be building (will it have padded walls)?
Well Slick, it appears safe to assume you didn't wake up this morning and smell the coffee.
You think PCGS has the time or desire to censor you!
And you think it's all a major plot against you between the members here and the staff at PCGS.
I'm sure you also think the Earth is flat.
It is a known glitch on the forum with photo loading problems.
Try clearing your browser & cookies.
If that doesn't work hit the preview button and then hit the post button.
If you didn't get yourself all worked into a frenzy and just asked "why can't I upload photos" you would know that no one is conspiring against you.
We didn't take your marbles away, you lost them all on your own.
First research how to spell planchet.
Where's my aluminum foil hat?
Successful BST with ad4400, Kccoin, lablover, pointfivezero, koynekwest, jwitten, coin22lover, HalfDimeDude, erwindoc, jyzskowsi, COINS MAKE CENTS, AlanSki, BryceM
Slick, you are aware that an XRF result tells only metal content not age correct? For example a genuine large cent will read something like 95% Copper, not 95% copper from 1793. An XRF is not effective showing genuine versus counterfeit/replica/fake. It would be effective showing if a copy was lead versus copper, but not if the replica is made from copper.
Just also, seems like you are stuck on this. PCGS, or any other grading service) does not grade coins HIGHER based on what you spend grading in the different tiers. You get the exact same eyes and opinions for the economy submission as you would for the walkthrough submission. The only difference is speed returned to you. How effective would coin grading be if you could just pay for a higher grade? I think you need to continue your research on PCGS and their services.
Not sure why I’m bothering, but I figured you may want to understand these basic facts first. Good luck with research!
We get these overly kinetic cartoon characters from time to time....https://i.imgur.com/I1QoJL7.jpg https://i.imgur.com/OqIPQYh.jpg?1
https://us.v-cdn.net/6027503/uploads/editor/7u/epd51sl5t695.jpg
This is an interesting thread when all of Slick's comments are greyed out.
I do love the ignore feature.
Coin Photographer.
For those who are curious what Slick is babbling about. Here is his image of a modern (and poorly made) copy of a 1793 Large Cent. It was purchased off eBay from a replica coin seller overseas, who had at the time many others available.
Slick, nobody here has blocked your ability to post images or words. You just are not using forum correctly. Ah, another area to research for you!
I'm glad my FUN show report is somewhere in the ether but this gets to continue 😂😂😂
BHNC #248 … 108 and counting.
Actually, trace metals in the XRF analysis could show that the planchets had the same source. This has been used for things like branch mint gold.
Well, that is something that has been studied with foreign planchets with regards to trace metals indicating what source/mine were producing them. While there are major disagreements on the results and what they actually tell, this is really not something that can be effectively used for US planchet stock during 1793. Much copper coinage circulating in the 1780s in the US was turned in for taxes or other uses and then melted for other use as the coins had been so badly devalued by 1790-92. Matter fact, the states ran advertisements in newspapers asking the public to turn in their old copper coins. There are federal cents struck over Talbot Allum Lee pieces, etc. If one were to know the specific sources of exactly what each coin was made from, you could maybe extrapolate something from that, but of course, this was not the case so XRF info will not lead to much discovery in that regard.
Also, worth noting is the inconsistencies in individual results using XRF. I am aware of a coin that was tested at least 6 times by 6 different people, all results were quite different with regards to metal percentages below 5%. Coin surface contamination from either contact with the ground or other contamination could drastically alter the results with trace metal percentages. Just worth a thought.
At the end of the day, XRF is not necessarily an effective tool in researching a counterfeit versus an authentic coin of this era. And believe me, it has been tried by some very talented and hopeful numismatists, none of which have been able to draw a conclusion to my knowledge from any coinage 1700s in America. And they have been using data compiled for the last 30 years!
Hey! This is not the proper place for informative and educational conversations!!!
Chopmarked Trade Dollar Registry Set --- US Gold Showcase --- World Gold Showcase --- World Chopmark Showcase
Well now new England I must triumph over that, jbk there is nothing there unless you go back through the reactions but I have opened it and I'm giving my email
First off that was a great reply New England, so I bet you know when the zinc recipe was let out to the public in Germany, yes when that coin slid out of my package I was bummed and kinda pissed off so I compared the dmg to what I bought on eBay for $31 plus shipping $7 = $38 of extreme fun so as bummed as I thought the edges were going to be super sharp so I tried to cut threw the 2x2 flip of school one, if I had to guess 20years old, it failed so I'd like to point out to everyone the smudge under Liberty is 100% my fault.
On this coin I beg to differ for it is 35% zinc give or take and I've pointed out 1795 plain edge large cents the have gouges and it is showing metal underneath
Anyways, so I took this coin to NGC and let the fun begin, so back then I was so new it was pretty funny and we started the counterfeit tests and then we got to the raised, well I didn't know what it was and hoopster was all over me so I told him I'd get better rim shots lol
Badaboomcha it he says it best, so I googled it
sure enough I was super wrong, right about now since I was using my camera and a microscope camera I was noticing the pictures didn't match and there was the one I bought under microscope zoom lens
Well Slick, if you are hopeful to see if a 1795 plain edge large cent is 35% zinc, and I guess you tested your coin and it is 35% zinc as well, you are in for some pretty big discrepancies and mysteries left to explain.
It looks like this but ten times better and I sound new here but not as thick of showing way more universal weakness
I see the marks that are on mine by the way
so I raced here with my zoomed lens pictures yes that's right the same coin posted 2 professional coin places same time, in fact here is where I got the universal weakness 
both days fake and I can only imagine cause it's super sweet condition.
Hey Slick, It looks like you figured out how to post a photo.
There goes your theory that PCGS is censoring you.
Still super bummed for this coin in hand was not the one I order but it was for the damage was spot on, so I don't know how I clicked and it was going nowhere for the dull face was driving away my push to find out more, so I started Google and what's safe on copper, being an ex painter of the Vail valley I knew about goof off
so I googled it and low and behold collector's universe had a post right there, I knew for the amount of responses it was a locked thread I read it, locked it in and g2g I was gone which I did mention it but they had already found it 
so I dipped it in goof off, well then instantly my crystal clear goof off was so cloudy black the only way I knew where it was cause it's a glass bowl,,,
I was thinking now I've done it LMAO
Just the coin that came out was superb and exactly the one I ordered well one extra smudge from a newbie I know
Off topic and jbk did you mean my copper 43 cent poorly repaired came back a 42 hmm the die markers is that's what we would call the lumps in the top of the 3 how did it predate one year and end up on this 2?
Note the to curl of the 2,
Lol a bold S mark under the bottom of the two
this coin has been graded ngc ms66 1942 D LWB
If you can't see on the 4 and the 2 will here it is circled
Slick, your IQ is getting lower with every post.
1942 we had no problems with any weakness but yet from where the gap begins and yes in one of my examples I used the white pencil to make it where I would need it to do this type of repairs, the 2 I can make the bottom look like it has not been struck,,,, is this what you wanted JBK
Slick, maybe to help save you some time and energy, here is an antiqued surface of your copy making it appear to have been lightly circulated and appear aged. Your copy can be found from many different sources overseas.
The graded ms68 1943 steel cent that broke is awesome 👍 let's jump to the mule cent
Someone left the cake out in the rain...
Yep Lance started a great thread and we said the same exact things and it was the fuel I needed, for I was off to find a match especially after finding the broken 1943 I felt I'm on a roll
Well I searched and search and searched I found the hub and die yes but not the reason why, until I checked my own coins and wow I've got it lol
What else you all got these were fun
Anyways the 1958 D which it isn't, had to be sent in for repairs over the date the filled B in Liberty
which you can see the repairs on the mule cent 
On the mule cent I tracked it down from what I call flow lines for 1958 the had a bunch but never in the same direction, flow lines under Liberty behind the neck, along with the date starting from the base.
Totally like being an investigator type 😁
Thanks again
Eric
Now it all comes from my profile picture and here is about another
1977 same S marks found yesterday and yes the 64 d/s
I'm a big fan of hair or it seems easier what abe has a side burn and what's that in his eye,,, wait a minute bow ties come with an S
Slick, If you go any further you are going to turn yourself inside out.
The quarter S mark at the end of quarter then go to the LL of dollar the king mark hmm looks like an S under the D not to mention to the left to the left, to the right to the right, what's that bottom of the branch is that a micro S, then go to pluribus unum in the bottom of the curve in the P and top of the U in Unum
Question on the quarter two beaks? Two left toes and the pillar the bird is on bottom left, is this doubling?
So I've been hunting 1793 for a like example but I'm floored and even almost said their coin was fake, they are everywhere just drawing a circle and I'm going right there them
