Since it seems like their views are not totally appreciated, I just want to express my opinion that the observations by Andreas and Daniel are relevant to this and the many other discussions concerning unmarked badges.
If we did not have differing opinions, this would not be healthy for our forum when various theories, no matter how clever or logically derived and expressed, are stated. In fact, it might verge on the boring as we stare at these little artifacts on our computer screens.
We need debate, we need opposing views, or we end up with speculation accepted as fact. Scientifically, the distinction between a hypothesis and a law and a theory and a law, are often blurry. Substantial testing is required for a theory to become a law, but to be clear, the testing is not required to be exhaustive. I think the doubts expressed by Andreas and Daniel fit into this process of testing.
Certainly, a highly creative individual or individuals can formulate a powerful theory without a lot of evidence to support it, at first anyway. However, testing can never prove anything as absolute truth, but a consensus can be obtained that the interpretation is provisionally correct.
Another German is a perfect example of the above in practice--Albert Einstein.
I have resisted many of these theories on KM badges, as is well known to Norm and Dietrich, but I accept most of them now--specifically the Schickle, Mayer, Zimmerman connection.
Do we know that an umarked Schwerin U-boat badge, identical in all respects to the marked version, was actually produced by Schwerin? No we do not but I accept that they were.
So to Andreas and Daniel, you opinions are appreciated by myself and probably many others that do not post here and on other forums even if many collectors tend to agree, based on the totality of the evidence presented so far, on who most probably produced certain unmarked badges from this period based on the theories articulated by Norm, Tom and others.
I categorically do not believe for a second that there is any intent to boost the prices of unmarked badges although that might be a consequence of this work. I for one would resist the newly created price point of "attributed" makers for unmarked badges and spend my money on marked examples if that is what is going on. The seller can keep his wares in that case and collectors can express their dissatisfaction with such valuation manipulation in the marketplace.
Naturally, much of the above can be lost if posts tilt to incivility, mocking, caustic ridicule, contempt concerning language ability (although I will be the first to admit native language ability is extremely helpful as the discussion concerning the documents posted by Giel attest), especially now. I do not think native German was particularly important 30 years ago, but the state of the hobby is far beyond those days. So we absolutely need our German members to help in this regard since if we are going to worry about a scratch at the 2 PM position in a die, or possible pin variations by a particular maker and call it a new variant, we need German speakers who can properly research and translate/interpret original documentation--the exchange between Dietrich, Andreas, and Daniel above is a case in point.
My two cents.
John
If we did not have differing opinions, this would not be healthy for our forum when various theories, no matter how clever or logically derived and expressed, are stated. In fact, it might verge on the boring as we stare at these little artifacts on our computer screens.
We need debate, we need opposing views, or we end up with speculation accepted as fact. Scientifically, the distinction between a hypothesis and a law and a theory and a law, are often blurry. Substantial testing is required for a theory to become a law, but to be clear, the testing is not required to be exhaustive. I think the doubts expressed by Andreas and Daniel fit into this process of testing.
Certainly, a highly creative individual or individuals can formulate a powerful theory without a lot of evidence to support it, at first anyway. However, testing can never prove anything as absolute truth, but a consensus can be obtained that the interpretation is provisionally correct.
Another German is a perfect example of the above in practice--Albert Einstein.
I have resisted many of these theories on KM badges, as is well known to Norm and Dietrich, but I accept most of them now--specifically the Schickle, Mayer, Zimmerman connection.
Do we know that an umarked Schwerin U-boat badge, identical in all respects to the marked version, was actually produced by Schwerin? No we do not but I accept that they were.
So to Andreas and Daniel, you opinions are appreciated by myself and probably many others that do not post here and on other forums even if many collectors tend to agree, based on the totality of the evidence presented so far, on who most probably produced certain unmarked badges from this period based on the theories articulated by Norm, Tom and others.
I categorically do not believe for a second that there is any intent to boost the prices of unmarked badges although that might be a consequence of this work. I for one would resist the newly created price point of "attributed" makers for unmarked badges and spend my money on marked examples if that is what is going on. The seller can keep his wares in that case and collectors can express their dissatisfaction with such valuation manipulation in the marketplace.
Naturally, much of the above can be lost if posts tilt to incivility, mocking, caustic ridicule, contempt concerning language ability (although I will be the first to admit native language ability is extremely helpful as the discussion concerning the documents posted by Giel attest), especially now. I do not think native German was particularly important 30 years ago, but the state of the hobby is far beyond those days. So we absolutely need our German members to help in this regard since if we are going to worry about a scratch at the 2 PM position in a die, or possible pin variations by a particular maker and call it a new variant, we need German speakers who can properly research and translate/interpret original documentation--the exchange between Dietrich, Andreas, and Daniel above is a case in point.
My two cents.
John
Comment