oldcopper

And two of the big poster-children for global warming have crashed and burnt: Second record year for coral cover (since records began 36 years ago) in the Great Barrier Reef. Polar bear populations are now estimated at 25-30 thousand up from 5-6 thousand in the 1960's. Neither of these observations is disputed, but both these iconic images were used to scare people into thinking that climate change was makng polar bears go extinct (no sea ice you know) and coral reefs bleaching then dying out. What was never mentioned was that coral reefs usually recover quickly from bleaching episodes - where was that comment in all the doom? This is how it works - we're given only the partial information that fits the narrative. Other information or factors that don't are ignored or downplayed as much as possible. This is not to say climate change isn't happening, it's just that the evidence for it that was shoved in our faces to produce an emotional reaction turns out to be wrong.

Fair point, I understand not wanting it to get too snarky of course, but this discussion involves winter heating payments and thus its climate change rationale which is trying to remove or minimise fossil fuels from our lives. This is in a part of the forum which is not specifically about coins and which I personally find interesting and a very important discussion to have. We're all grown-ups on here, and no one wants the discussion to get bad-tempered, but it's important to get your point or points out there, and not allow the political discussion to be dominated by people who, in your opinion, are talking nonsense.

Thanks - I see someone unsurprisingly is applying the stereotyped smear of attacking the participants rather than listening to and addressing their point. He can't help it.

Here's a personal experience of science and politics mixing, and guess which came off worse? 35 years ago, the cloud from Chernobyl was crossing the UK and a bloke in my shared house worked in a junior position for an environmental monitoring company. They were contracted by the government's MAFF to pick up sheep droppings in the Lake District and measure their radioactivity. So off he went, bagged it all up and sent his samples off to be measured and then the company wrote a report to MAFF on their findings. Some time later the report got returned by MAFF and large chunks of it had been crossed out in red! I remember my housemate talking about resigning (he didn't in the end). He was not at all happy about it. Presumably the actual radiation figures were deemed politically unacceptable by MAFF so the report had to be altered to play down these levels, like missing out the higher levels found and just concentrating on the lower readings. So no one would have worried too much about the radiation in the fall out, as the government would have assured them that all the research showed how low level it all was. Moral in that case - if science and politics mix, science comes off worse. And for some reason, both climate change and Covid are now political footballs.

No, let's get this straight. You aren't choosing what to believe, that implies a reasoned open-minded attitude. You are being told what to believe, and even when contrary information is staring you in the face, you still cling to what you've been programmed to think. Also, if the narrative changes or even flip-flops, you seamlessly adopt the new right-think without even being aware that what they were telling you some time ago with the same certainty, was very different. The world is not run on principles, it is run on money, and those with the most money to dole out get the largest influence. Gates is the biggest financial contributor (if you include his GAVI alliance - he's second otherwise) to the WHO and he also funds much of the world's research into vaccines and other research institutes like Imperial College and thus people like Neil Ferguson, a big and very much officially promoted influence on our needless self-destruction of lockdown. Bil and Melinda have also given hundreds of millions of dollars to the Western media via their Foundation (all open information), and so we all think he's a great guy because that is all we are told about him. And he might be, but greasing the media's palms promotes that perception of him, and relegates any negative side. Why is he allowed to effectively bribe the world's media like this? None of the above is "conspiracy theory", it is all information published openly giving what the B&M Gates Foundation has disbursed. And Bill's overall wealth has increased by 26 billion dollars (a year ago) during the pandemic which has overall resulted in the largest wealth grab from the middle classes into the pockets of the hyper-rich. That information is from the investigative journalist Robert F Kennedy amongst others, and as a self-proclaimed left-winger you, as with the rest of us, should be appalled by that. But you wouldn't care even if you knew. That's not something you've been told to get concerned about. Who's Robert F Kennedy and can you believe him? Where's his proof? Fair question. Is it just another conspiracy theory? Well, firstly, no one's denied it and if anyone has got his recently published "The real Anthony Fauci" the level of corruption and deceit he uncovers spanning several decades at the top of the medical establishment in the US is staggering. OK, again how can you believe him? Because no one is even attempting to sue him for anything in this book. And he's having a go at some of the richest and most powerful people in the world. Butr these people are essentially untouchable so they don't care. The book lands like a big tree falling in the middle of the forest. The media studiously ignore it. And both medicine and science in certain areas have been absolutely corrupted by money. Whoever pays for the research and controls the medicinal establishment will get the research or agreement they want, and this is kept in place by fear via this whole new hierarchy of morality where if you don't agree totally with the official narrative you acquire a bad name such as "denier" (with its intentional echo of holocaust denier) or an "anti-vaccer" or a this or a that,. This cements the groupthink. So Brian Stelter: But 97% of climate scientists think that global warming is happening. Meteorological guest: Because the government doles out 2.5 billion dollars a year into research into climate change and only funds the people who give them the answers they want. Make of that what you will. And PS this e-mail hasn' been specifically written for Peckris. He probably stopped reading after 5 words.

Congratulations! Textbook stuff. Let's run through it. "Deniers" - great start. Shoehorned that into the first sentence ie anyone who looks at something from a different angle to you or has a different opinion is a "denier". Then the made-up (as usual) amazement that people are pointing out..., well what are they pointing out? You ignore the elephant in the room and despite looking very closely I can't see the word China anywhere in your post. But where's "Daily Mail" - you used it last time but missed a trick here. That killer riposte is taking a break I see. I tell you what amazes me - that anyone in their right mind can assert that the intermittent renewable energy sources of wind and solar (not nuclear, but that's going nowhere fast at present) can in any way be a substitute for fossil fuels. You can't run any industry, especially heavy industry, on an intermittent energy source, much of society's needs will depend on a high carbon-footprint manufacture and installation technology which supplies low and fickle electricity, and these solar panels and wind turbines will last 15-20 years then be chucked away. Fridges, ovens, building heating - all required reliable energy. And you won't be able to drive anywhere if last night wasn't windy enough. Or is every household going to have a massive toxic Chinese-produced battery the size of a chest of drawers to give stability of energy supply? Eco-friendly or what! But don't worry, massive improvements in renewables technology will come along and save us just in the nick of time - we just have to take your word for that, but even your illusory massive improvements won't change the whole flawed concept of renewables I'm afraid. Nuclear excepted again, yet 30 years of non-investment into nuclear has buried that one for the foreseeable future. But here comes Bill Gates, nuclear plant manufacturer par excellence......he's got an idea you say? "I'd rather be proved wrong on climate" - no you wouldn't and you're quite prepared to sacrifice our economy and standard of living in a pointless gesture to give you the satisfaction that "at least we tried". so hang the consequences, so long as your media and government primed conscience is satisfied. That's the important thing of course. If any of the politicans or XR idiots actually really believed in the link between CO2 and global warming, wouldn't they be banging down China and India's doors to express their terror at what the world's major polluters were ramping up. That they couldn't care less says it all.

Sorry, "very little way", not "very little was". Another worry is that high oil and gas prices might actually mean higher CO2 production, not lower, as poorer countries switch to cheaper coal, a less efficient and more polluting energy source that emits far more CO2 for the heat it produces.

"Never was a truer word spoken"!!? If so there must be a pattern that indicates this is not a freak event. Have our previous Summers been getting this hotter and drier? Is there a long-term gradient/trend which has not been matched before? And was 1976 a freak event? - yes it was, but if that happened today the end of the world would be nigh! You can see the desperation in Peckris in trying to ascribe everything to climate change. It's like a religious cult. If the next few summers are as hot and dry, or hotter and dryer that would indicate a pattern, but it may just be a cyclic weather phenomeon anyway. It might, just might be down to man-made CO2 emissions, but we have very little was of confirming that. But a pattern will have to happen before anyone can pronounce on this. Secondly, p*ssing in the wind is the correct analogy. China is increasing its coal use by 300 million tons this year to just over 3 billion tons. In 2021 India consumed over a billion tons of coal, the USA 0.5 billion. Our coal use last year was 8.6 million tons by way of comparison. Work out the percentage that is of the others!

it's all based on computer modelling, none of which has been even remotely right in the past. The arctic isn't ice-free yet despite all the forecasts from "climate experts" and polar bear populations are doing well, despite the forecasts again, the Maldives hasn't sunk yet........ It's like Neil Ferguson from Imperial College (donation at least £150 million courtesy of the B&M Gates Foundation). Nobody could be more wrong more often, yet he's still in a job, wheeled on by the awestruck BBC now and again. Yet the computer code he undertook his Covid modelling on was found to be old and deeply flawed. But he did get the sack temporarily, because he went to see his girlfriend during lockdown. Just like the government, all these experts are quite happy to break their own rules, because they know the real risk ie they aren't in their mid eighties and/or suffering from serious co-morbidities....

I notice that some of their estimates are remarkably low.

It's all up in the air and c ompletely non-transparent. Say your maximum bid is £800 for a £5-600 estimate. If you get it for £600 you might think they're being honest and you've done well. However, in an open auction you might have got it for £400. Who's to say anyone bid £400 - £550? So who flippin' knows. The fact they're carrying on this blind bidding is a bit worrying as well - it obviously suits them. A lot of the Noble Numismatics copper went for way below estimate, but I don't think LC would allow that to happen. They'll pump it up to at least low estimate if the sole bid maximum is above that.

It's OK, we'll just have to rely on the honesty of the auctioneers! Which is a completely unknown factor behind closed doors. They will have completely free rein to do as they like. So not all bids will win at their maximum of course, that's too obvious, but who's to know how honest their final price is?

I thought the ending was complete rubbish, considering we'd been teased for all those episodes about him escaping. It was just nonsense and none of the built-up expectation they'd stoked up over all those episodes was resolved. Sorry, my one and only comment on the Prisoner!

Oh just shaddapayour face!

Yes they were - both the 1825/6 and the 1853 copper proof 1d to 1/4d's were all seemingly struck with full lustre, a few remain with pretty good lustre as above. Many have toned beautifully, as copper proofs can do. However, the only really full lustre copper proofs extant are from Soho. The James Watt collection (Morton and Eden 2002) had some incredible1806 copper proofs and 1805 Irish copper proofs, definitely a class above the Royal Mint ones. Brilliant fiery mirrored orange red. A set of the 1806 copper penny to farthing (along with the sets of the gilt and bronzed analogues) reappeared on the market a few years ago.

Hey, don't rub it in!

Yes, couldn't resist showing it! - bought Stacks Bowers 2013 for ~£1800. Bought it with the following 1841 colon: https://www.noonans.co.uk/auctions/archive/lot-archive/results/272162/ That only cost about £200, but I sold it to a dealer friend for not much more than that - I had a better example already (the LCA 2009 Roland Harris one) and bought it as it was cheap. He stuck it into DNW and got £850 hammer for it! Both these coins came from the "Demarete" collection, According to Stacks Bowers he bought much of his stuff in London from the mid-50's onwards. Coincidentally Peck's P.1480 was sold in SNC mid-60's and described as having a mark on the face, which this one does as well. So I wonder if both this coin and the stunner 1853 were both ex-Peck, as in the same SNC list was Peck's 1853 copper proof penny (FDC as all his coins were graded in SNC - "all coins FDC unless stated otherwise"). The photo of the proof in Stacks Bower's archive is the same sort of appearance as the Verene specimen, which just shows how flattering the PCGS photography is!

i like this one! The 65RB - takes some time to load the full image. https://www.pcgs.com/valueview/victoria-1838-1901/1853-1d-s-3948-rb/3946?sn=202429&h=pop

I think there are mitigating factors re the copper and bronzed proofs. This is a facet of buying from Noble, for example their silver always photographs well and shows colour, lovely blueishness in many of them,, gold is gold of course, one assumes good brilliance in proofs and the colour is normally not too variable. But the copper photography is in my view understated. Not the definition of course - that's top rate, but the general appearance. As it's Australia, no-one (except Australian buyers near to Sydney) will likely see them in the flesh and thus have anything more to go on than a single photograph taken in incidental light, so the only way to ascertain any colourful toning or brilliance is through the auctioneer's description which will always be subjective to an extent. So are you going to end up with a matt brown dull bronzed proof or a colourful or brilliant example? It's a bit of a lottery unless you know the coin from a previous sale. Interesting how the two coppers to most buck the trend were both copper proof farthings, 1826 and 1853 (erroneously labelled as W.W raised), $1900 and $2600.

I expect those are "educated guesses" - take the proof set issue (known) then add on whatever you think for the individual issues. Unless the Royal Mint has any specific total production records, which I doubt, that's all it will be.

Thanks - very interesting!

I'd love to know why all these temperature readings are taken at busy airports - large amount of hot tarmac, plenty of jet streams providing localised warming. It's almost like they want to get as high a temperature reading as possible. Heathrow and Gatwick (Charlwood). Coningsby is an active RAF base as well. The cynic might wonder if they were deliberately wanting to record as high a temperature as possible. I was reading that higher altitude temperature measuring stations have been closed over the last few decades and most if not all the readings are now obtained in the vicinity of busy airports. If so, there may be a good reason, but I wonder what it is. Any ideas?

Wrong scene!

Thinking about it, two scenarios occur to me; either the copper proofs were made before the bronzed proofs and this die polish line only appeared then, or the toning has hidden the hairline from view.

Strange it's not apparent on the copper proof. Worth further research as they say. My currency has the noticeable fake ribbons as you mention, probably more evident than yours.