Authenticity unverifiable" does not mean that PCGS thinks the coin is fake; it means that they are unable to confirm one way or the other."
Correct in their meaning of "Authenticity Unverifiable," and therefore many people, such as your own wording further down, would then treat this coin as a fake and pass it over. Many would think it worth melting down.
That is exactly what this video is all about.
I am not a trained grader with double eagle expertise and was easily able to verify this coin. In fact I have posted the second part to this video where I match it up with the exact die it came from. And I did not get paid the huge fees PCGS did.
. using the processes in place to evaluate, authenticate and grade submissions.
My point concerns this very idea. PCGS was paid a large fee to grade this coin. The "process in place" should be much more competent if a rookie like myself who has no special experience with double eagle can prove for no cost to myself that it is a legitimate coin.
They abandoned computer technology in the 90s to go back to what they called a system subject to human error. This is the system they still use. When they abandoned using a scientific method for coin evaluation, they it was b/c people did not trust computers (which was true then - yet the entire world went to computers anyway.except them). Now that computers are everywhere, they still won't go back to using science and continue holding onto the method they called inferior.
Using science would also kill the very profitable re-slabbing game that is played. Businesses tend to go where the money is...so I admit I wonder if this is not the reason. Facial recognition technology by now is well advanced enough to train an AI. They could even base it on the current system. If they showed an AI what, say 1000 MS63 Morgans looked like according to already graded examples, the AI could "take the average" and come up with always repeatable grades for the same coin as well as detect the slightest imperfections in fakes (still would need weighed, etc).
When these fakes can even duplicate bag marks from the source coin, is overlaying one coin over another really that useful? Sure, it can weed out the obvious fakes, but I'm not sure if an overlay helps with the good ones.
Which is why I posted the part about Daniel Carr in the video. Counterfeits take no special magic to detect. They take some homework. As the video shows, it does not take much homework.
While you are not certain an overlay will show a fake, that is likely bc you have never done them or done any research into detecting fakes. there are plenty of posts on this forum from the past showing this exact method to be legitimate.
Although I am just the average Joe collector, I have had fun looking into identifying fake coins. I can tell you from experience, there is no magic that has to be used. And the original mint dies are not able to be duplicated.
To the major premise that if the evaluation example overlay matches a genuine one it is from genuine dies, well I have a few along with some swampland I would be willing to sell !!!
Anyone is entitled to an opinion. But without anything except opinion, there is nothing legitimate to stand on.
I am a former science teacher who stressed to my students that science is based upon observation and not theory. I took some scientific data, the PCGS verified coin pictures (I even mentioned how the PCGS pictures at coinfacts can be verified as legit examples b/c their overlays show they were all from the same MASTER die (used to produce all the working dies for these coins used in that year), thereby legitimizing the die overlay I used scientifically.
The image seemed more "sleight of hand" watching than any actual still overlays I have been involved with.
So just how does one camp what is under an overlay unless the overlay is made transparent?
At first you see a static image. Ten the top image starts to become transparent (overlay definition) and finally the part that was overplayed is revealed.
How is this slight of hand? You see both coins, you see the transparency shows none of the elements are out of position in the least (except the mint mark which makes sense since they were hand punched into working dies).
Some hard facts as to your opinions would be appreciated so I could improve, but the facts of the matter is you get varying levels of transparency in this video and can stop it at any time to make it like any static overlay.
It would be interesting to know any of the dimensional checks they may have conducted in their evaluation, which would make theirs much more "scientific" than this in my opinion.
It passes all measured dimensions. It passes for weight. It passes what dealers use for verifying metal content with (and obviously the magnet slide test). And I showed every design element is exactly like the master die that these coins were made from.
Fro my years of teaching science classes, all those data points pass for. They are repeatable. They are not based upon opinion (such as your statement). Those are the physical characteristics of this coin. They are the hard scientific facts.
As you said, your opinion is what you are using to rebut this. The grading companies are also subject to he laws of science. There is no special system/manner/etc. they have that the likes of mere mortals cannot comprehend. It is faith and opinion that make people think this and reject what their eyes can show them.
I don't see how a simple overlay technique can guarantee authenticity. Many of the best counterfeits are from transfer dies that essentially replicate a genuine coin, so an overlay would be expected to match exactly.
If you will do a search here on the forum, you will see how this is the method taught to be one of the most accurate. This is also why I included the Daniel Carr overlay. It was on this forum somewhere he said it is impossible to replicate an original die. Please research him if you do not know who he is and what he does. While he spark erosion technique can duplicate even bag marks from an original (also cast dies), researching more about them will show that they also are detectable - which is why burfle23 could post a picture of a coin marked as counterfeit.