What a revolting development this has become.
OK Joe, really?
Tell me Joe, what's shocking to you? Do you know me? Ever met me? Estimated my intelligence level? Hmmm?
What is shocking is with each time you post you clearly reveal your intelligence quotient much to the chagrin of all reading and continue adding to the misery of the members. Don't need to meet and with any luck at all, I never will.
I picked up on the edge beveling Joe, because Ron mentioned it in the Heiser v Johnson thread that I read, and there was only a cursory response about it. I thought hmmm, let me look into that. Not rocket science Joe.
As to me sounding like Ron, that may be because I am, like he is, a pretty smart feller. Able to think for myself.
Pat yourself on the back, no one else will.
Now to your long drawn out EVASIVE post above.
I asked you for provenance, you gave me referenced threads. Provenance Joe, provenance.
I gave you threads for review because your reading comprehension sucks. Your cognitive skills suck. Your interaction skills with others suck.
Die cuts
Belt loop shapes
Overall stitching. PROVENANCE PLEASE!
Butterfly shape
Those are all observations Joe....not provenance.
Sorry, try again. I will not accept your opinion as provenance.
I provided you with provenance, you gave me opinion.
No, they are not “observations’, they are traits much more so than stamp orientations and serif numbers as of course I have stated previously but you don’t absorb shit. You can’t change the die cut, it is what it is. Problem is YOU DON’T HAVE A CLUE TO WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT. ZIP. NADA. ZILCH.
You don't even know what provenance is. What provenance have you ever provided for anything? Anywhere? You can't even discern one die cut, one sewing machine, one maker from another. You only bloviate.
You don't see the difference in any sheaths of any photos posted beyond your serif stamps and now "edge bevel". Which by the way you were reviewing I guess yesterday a post of Ron’s from 3 months ago or more, and just happened to pull that little tidbit out and mistakenly thought you had something, yet you can’t comprehend anything I have posted an hour ago?!?! Totally believable.
I question, frankly, your overall opinion on these early RMK sheaths. Specifically, here is why.
1) You stated in your footnotes 3 that:
My final thought is that for my collecting purposes, and the resemblance to Heiser sheaths aside, until some evidence arises to determine otherwise I still consider all these early sheaths with the Randall Made Knives logo to be made by Maurice Johnson. It just keeps it nice and simple.
Anyone who would rather keep it nice and simple, and lump them all together as Johnson made, knowing that many are Heiser/HKL, as evidenced by your statements, illustrates to me that you are confused by the whole mess.
My only confusion lies in why I even get into a “conversation” with someone of your ilk.
To be frank, I long to go back to those days and just have fun with the knives spreading goodwill and cheer amongst collectors. *sigh* Then BANG, I am smacked back to the reality of dealing with morons.
You openly contradict yourself.
Yaaaawwwwn
As I suspected, when I gave you examples backed with commonly known sheaths with Heiser/RMK provenance, I knew full well that you would respond with in essence, "trust me, I just know that these West facing, serif numbered sheaths I have shown you are Johnson made.”
You didn’t provide shit. Like I said, you don’t even know what provenance is. All you have done is state the obvious that is and has been known. Other than that just annoy people and degrade this forum.
YOU HAVE NO PROVENANCE Joe, to back up those years of claims. Only years of handling them. Man, you have been doing this so many years, think back to those early days when you started giving info about these early RMK sheaths. Did you EVER provide actual provenance for it? Or just an educated guess?
You weren’t there were you. Nope. I can’t keep repeating what I have said over and over to a guy that cannot grasp most anything that is said. Then only wants to argue.
Forget hands on for the moment, but the photos that are clear as day showing an HKL and Johnson BB next to each other and STILL CAN’T SEE THE DIFFERENCE. I can look at the friggin thing and tell you what it is. Just as Cap did with his #7 sheath. Apparently as Ron did with his 6 model 3 sheaths. As Gary Clinton did plucking the one Johnson out of 6 model 1 sheaths. FYI, it was R up (west) and has serif numbers.
Again, handling sheaths obviously doesn't mean much to you, Mr Mathews has handled a few, has he not? Oh but he is mistaken?
No Joe, you are.
Whooooah!! Hold on here. Ron asked me to be left out of this Sam. Integrity check here. We’ll see if he comes on again and chastises you the same way.
This is about YOU sam, let’s not forget that.
Another moronic statement. I have suggest throughout these threads that is is important to have hands on experience. i have throughout these threads suggested attending shows and examining others collections. Of course Ron has handled sheaths, probably half of what I have, and I don’t think he would argue that.
To respond, Ron has never said what he thought since he left that I know of. On his photo of the 6, count ‘em 6, model 3 sheaths, he said 5, count ‘em 5, were Johnson’s. Two of those Johnson’s have what you call “west” facing RMK stamps, serif numbers, center snap location. The variable traits that YOU say makes them HKL. Two have what you call "east" facing RMK stamp, no numbers, edge snap location. He calls them ALL Johnson's and he
handled every one of them. Have you inquired about that?
Who is contradictory?
I don’t know where he stands at this point. It doesn’t matter nor do I care. I will say this though, if he says in some of those comparison photos of HKL and Johnson brown button sheaths that there is no difference, he is being intellectually dishonest.
Much like Ron, I am through with this discussion with you. Unless you have provenance for any of it.
Good day Sir.
There is a God.
Previous Topic
Index
