Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 158
  1. #71

    Please login to view user info
    Im having trouble adding pix today. I have a real clean solid red diamond HJ. I tried to put the pix file link here but if it does not work the knife is HJ334 on my site. The solid red diamond has good movement. The knife is unmarked & scabbard leather is L&S marked which is uncommon for a later scabbard. My impression is that this knife is 1940 - 1941ish vintage. I am continually impressed with the varience in the production of the HJ knives. This is the cleanest solid red I have seen. It came from a Vets estate in Georgia.

    dds.jpg dds1.jpg dds3.jpg dds4.jpg

  2. #72
    I added four of the pics from the HJ334 page DDH

    Just for info, links to externally-hosted attachments are not permitted on the forum because their removal from the external host (in this case once the knife has sold and you no longer require that page) would render any posts which depend on them redundant.

  3. #73

    Please login to view user info
    There may be some issue with my software that will not allow me to add pix thru the sites insert vehicle. I can open it & see the computer option but cant proceed from there. Im on a new windows 8. Thanks for the pix help. d.d.h.

  4. #74

    This may be related to the recent server change as I had that the same problem for a short time a few days ago. A hard refresh of your browser may help as this will bypass your browser cache and load a fresh version of the forum from the server. Let me know how you get on.

  5. #75

    Part I.

    Hi Guys.

    After spending a long time reading the recent WAF thread on opaque diamonds, I thought I would just try and spice things up, and bring the "experts" back onto track.

    I couldn't quite believe the replies actually, and the sheer arrogance of a few people posting- who for some reason seem to delight in trying to make others look stupid, by raising the most absurd points, and turning the very real question of opaque enamel, into a battle of the reputations, weighing up vet bring back, vet estate clearance stories against what certain experts claim to know, as well as denouncing anyone and everything that stands in the path of those who are clinging to old and very wrong stories about opaque enamel.

    It seems that the "Monkeys" who are fighting over the last Banana, don't actually eat bananas! The few threads about this have been going on for a long time now, and apart from bitching and moaning, I don't see any effort being made to actually research what they are fighting over. People are talking down their noses at others, belittling common sense, and logical - and reasonable questions, and shrugging the whole thing off as a "you either believe of you don't, now move on!" in other words shut up! Or, in other words, we who are bitching the loudest, and demanding the most respect, demanding the attention of those who don't have any right to challenge us, we don't actually do any research, because we only know how to bitch and moan and make others feel stupid! We only know how to enforce our opinion on others. It is pathetic, it really is.

    I have seen questions raised, used in defense of, or in support of, absolute crap. Questions pertaining to everything but what should be discussed. It is clear that many people who are fiercely defending their opinions, (pro as well as contra) are doing so by way of verbal abuse instead of actual research. I have seen my name mentioned on one of these threads at WAF, and mentioned in such a way as if everyone should be waiting for the release of my latest book as the second bloody coming - after my book is released, all will be well, all will be explained…. That's probably as far away from the truth as it gets. As much as my book deals with the errors of past publications, and goes a long way in clearing up many misnomers and errors, the meat of it is based on actual research, research that anyone can do, and research that must be done in future. Hands on research, not any fairy tales first, or reputations first - that's the old way, and the reason why we have all been screwed for so long, because these reputations are about as sordid as they get, and have been, and are still, poisoning the minds of anyone who gets in their way.

    The only way forward now, the only way to answer tricky questions that history cannot explain in black and white, it to use the assistance of forensic science. The only way to challenge a banana-eating, tree-swinging ape, who derives pleasure from belittling others - an ape who has seen 200 million bananas, yet is incapable of bringing any [actual] bananas to the table, is to slap him down with hard research, honest research, research that is conclusive and cannot be challenged by any reputation or story.

    I have covered the topic of opaque vs. translucent enamel in my book, with many examples, on many pages. The topic of applying forensic science to our hobby to answer questions" has been briefly addresses here by me a few times, but is complicated and can only be touched on, on a forum post. It is covered in detail in my book, and once read and understood, will become clear that it is concussive, and will triumph over any all every opinion, regardless of what we want to think, or would prefer to believe.

    I will present one example below that is not in the book, but may hopefully light a spark in the minds of those who may want to answer questions like "Is it real" for themselves without having to read through 20 pages of banana-republic posts first, and wade knee deep through slain users and battered egos, just to gather 1 or 2 bits of semi-coherent information.

    The following images, divided into three parts, show two official membership badges. One makes use of translucent red enamel, the other opaque red. Both badges are unquestionably authentic, and both badges were unquestionably made using the identical obverse and reverse dies. The possible time period that they can be attributed to is a complicated one, but one that I have successfully addressed in my book. I will only address a few main pointers on this thread, but enough to give you the general idea of how you can inspect an item, and be 100% sure of the results without 1000 bickering apes throwing bananas at you.


    FIG1. Obverse of both badges.


    FIG2. Reverse of both badges.

    Why are both authentic?


    FIG3. A magnified image of the die flaw on the number 1 in the
    code M1/ of the translucent badge


    FIG4. A magnified image of the identical die flaw on the number 1 in the
    code M1/ of the opaque badge.

  6. #76

    Part II.


    FIG5. A magnified image of the die flaw on the number 5 in the
    code 85 of the translucent badge.


    FIG6. A magnified image of the identical die flaw on the number 5 in the
    code 85 of the opaque badge.


    FIG7. A magnified image of the (complicated) die flaws on the letter Z, in the
    code of the translucent badge.


    FIG8. A magnified image of the identical (complicated) die flaws on the letter Z, in the
    code of the opaque badge.

  7. #77

    Part III. Zero Tolerance

    Unquestionably authentic


    FIG9. A magnified image of the micro-patina on the outer rim of the translucent badge.


    FIG10. A magnified image of the micro-patina on the outer rim of the opaque badge.

    Unquestionably, does not apply to a story, it does not apply because a few certain individuals want it to be so. Unquestionably – when clear evidence is presented, that cannot be refuted on the basis of a chirping ape alone, in this case, forensic science, then it can be used. Micro errors die flaws and micro patina cannot be recreated by human hand. What we find under extreme magnification cannot be seem with the naked eye. It cannot be duplicated, and it cannot be challenged!

    My question, which I would prefer to have answered by an ape, and not the regular few who are “debating about this very topic” – [ so feel free to link this 3-part post to other forums..]
    Why is my opaque badge, which as you have seen, was made using the same tooling as the translucent badge, not genuine? Why, when forensic science is showing me that my badge is genuine – (in my book examples like this are further supported with micro studies on the enamel as well as many other micro-aspects not addressed here due to trying to keep it concise) why is it not original? I would really like to know what evidence, what concrete evidence, the denouncers of opaque enamel have, that would contradict forensic science, and prove a micro-examination incorrect. What evidence do these denouncers have, what research have they been doing? please point me to their research, i still have a few months until my book is released, and i could correct all the 500 odd pages of in-depth research i have spent many years doing... show me the monkey-business!!! the monkey-research!!

  8. #78

    I will see your banana, and raise you an orange


    Lets not forget our beloved friend Otto Hoffmann. Good reproductions exist in opaque and translucent enamel! There is no need to be afraid of opaque enamel as such, but there is good reason to be afraid of solid, independent, in-depth and conclusive, RESEARCH !

  9. #79

    Please login to view user info
    It is my opinion that WAF is more like an exercise in keeping status quo. Many people not knowing much who seek approval from other people who do not know much either. Also many people who are dealers, are friends with dealers or who want to stay as customers of dealers and are all too scared or apprehensive when they have to deecide who to support. They are happy as long as things are staying like they always were. New research showeing that they were wrong is welcome like a fart is welcome. I read the thread on this enamel over there and all of the usual ingredients are there- complacency as Garry said, egos like Jo said. The world of collecting will not get control of our hobby back if that carrys on

    Good work Jo Rivett and thumbs up to this forum

  10. #80
    Keeping the Status Quo is all fine and well, and may even work in some cases, but it is supported by..? by what? by research? where is the research? it`s all babble babble and shove shove...a bash over the head here, a kick in the jollies there, and a whack down with "Do you realize that we have a combined 100,000,000,000 years experience in this game sonny, do you realize that should you dare to challenge us, we will make you look like a fool" (this was threatened already by a user called Hermit, or Hermann..)

    Maybe for a new reader, reading words i wrote above like APE, MONKEY and a few others, they may think that i am no better, well i am better, much better, and i allow myself the use of such words as compensation for my time invested in the research that i present. Aint no way a monkey will say "Cheers for the Banana, and Cheers for slapping me in the face with it.." so instead i take compensation for the time and cash i invest in this by allowing myself the right, to call a monkey, a monkey. Call it as i see it, as it is!

    For sure, nobody wants to look like a fool on line, and for sure egos will get rubbed the wrong way - but the problem is that the people doing the rubbing, and doing the fooling, are NOT doing any research, not offering the slightest hint of a banana peel in return for the many hours and dollars invested by those trying to say, WAKE UP; and smell your food, it aint a banana you have, it`s an Orange, no matter what your 10 squeaking chums say, it`s an Orange and thats it!

Page 8 of 16 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

HJ-Research, the Hitler Youth Militaria Collector Forum
Copyright © 2009 -
Web Hosting by Vidahost "Hosting for Life"