DougB exposes "Champagne Rune" SS Decal Fraud and Adds a Coffin Nail to XRFacts

[Niblet]

"I believe you are referring to the Mythbusting the Champagne Decal thread. While this link will get you to the GHW2 website, the information itself no longer exists or is no longer accessible there."

Exactly! looking for the original text to this article,,I'm sure someone has it ,,,could I get a copy from someone please?

 

[M45]

That sounds like a pretty tall order. I understand that the basic information is found in the recent book on German helmet decals by Ken N. and Anders Lehman.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding changes in the NS decal: Are the M42 decals different decals than the ones found on the M35 NS? Yes they differ indeed. It should be noted that ET SS decals change in about 1940 and there are 2 distinct Pocher and Q decals which appear to be from printing anomalies as the runes are "fatter" or "thinner", some appear to be double strikes or even triple strikes, and the print variation appears to be that of ink displacement which could be from sheet alignment or when the press was reinked. EF SS decals are the only ones which never ever change. Decals like any piece of equipment also evolve and this is noted with non SS decals as well as well as print anomalies giving a decal a slightly different look. The concern I have is there are 7 different kind of changes in these M42 variety of decals. The major changes I have observed are the runes which appear to "float" within the border, never aligning tightly, inconsistent spacing between the runes, width of the decal, and the thickness of the shield, including a very thick shield. This makes identifying real from fake a bitch indeed, especially for non SS helmet collectors and even for prudent SS helmet collectors. This is why many avoid them and I do not blame them one bit.


DougB here discusses print variations found on established SS decals and notes variations in the NS-SS (aka C-SS) decal as well, print anomalies (including non-SS decals) that give the decals a slightly different look.

He notes 7 different kinds of changes (variations) of C-SS found on M42 shells and this is 'a concern',




-The major changes I have observed are the runes which appear to "float" within the border, never aligning tightly, inconsistent spacing between the runes, width of the decal, and the thickness of the shield, including a very thick shield.

These are all consistent with a template spray painted forgery.





If collectors were looking for a definitive answer from DougB about C-SS (re: is C-SS real, or is C-SS fake ? ) they did not find it in this paragraph or even by searching the entire synopsis IMO. He does not make any such proclamations. While he notes variations in C-SS, he also mentions variations found in other period decals giving a nod to C-SS legitimacy. But then he says that the 7 variations of C-SS are a "concern", casting doubt upon C-SS.


One must consider whether the print variations in established TR decals could be considered minor compared to the striking variations found in C-SS. Why does DougB not simply conclude that all C-SS are fake based on these striking variations ? Because he has apparently become convinced that SOME C-SS are authentic, namely the few NS M35s and hkp M42s with C-SS because of the consistent appearance of the shields and helmets. Other details of these no doubt aided his beliefs, such as the '3 named and 2 fully researched' NS M35s and the hkp M42 that was 'vet procured' by Kelly H. 30 years prior.


-M35 NS; - Champagne decals; I prefer to call them NS decals. Why, because on the NS M35 they are distinct, appear on 1938 marked shells painted exactly the same using NS party decals.
Regarding hkpM42 shells; this is the gold standard for me for NS decals on an M42. Why, because they follow the identical application standards - few, tight cluster of lot numbers, matching decals - as on the M35 NS.

Some C-SS variations. All 5 helmet manufacturers, M35/M40/M42 and transitionals represented here, something that never seemed to bother the 'researchers'.

3. NS M42 ND with C-SS coming apart at the seams.
1. TVG C-SS on ET M35, a nice scratch across both finish and painted rune, probably to prove 'originality'.
4. A transitional with C-SS, the character lines of the old paint showing through the C-SS painted bug.
5. CKL M42 ND with C-SS, probably the most common maker/model with C-SS (often unissued), these had become 'a concern' for Doug after lot# research revealed problems with them.
6. Q M40 with C-SS, probably made earlier in the scam before Q-SS factory decal realized.
7. Probably a CKL M42 with C-SS, its flatness becomes apparent when viewed at a certain angle.
8. Determined to be 'a good copy of the champagne decal' by the 'experts'.
9. The ckl M42 'paint-ball camo' with painted C-SS bug worn to factory finish. p.166 "SS-Steel"
10.An hkp M42 ND with narrow C-SS bug and thick border, probably an early trial version in the attempt to 'get it right'.
2. EF M40 C-SS, painted on top of damaged factory finish.
11. EF M42 ND with C-SS, inconsistent shield breaks and rune dimensions reflecting custom template work.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding Fake NS decals; Do they fake these decals, yes indeed. I know of 2 distinct fakes that are very good, one even was printed using a gold toned pulver to simulate the bronze aging effect. Because there are so few real samples and so few collectors have them, they really muddy the waters of what is real and what is not. I know the varieties and there are some I believe are fake and will not touch. But this does not mean all NS decals are fake anymore than all Pocher decals are fake or all thin winged KM decals are fake (or even KM for that matter) However as I described above it makes identification of them very hard indeed and you need to have an evolved and highly trained eye to spot with definition a real SS NS M42 applied fake from a real one. Anyone saying they can definitively tell a real from a fake from 99% of the photos on forums of these is kidding themselves as these must be in hand and must be magnified. Mind you this can be said for any helmet and there is an ET fake decal that will spin your head. I will for this reason never buy an EF M42 SS with an ET decal on it. Those that do are taking a huge risk in my opinion.


Talk about 'muddying the waters of what is real and what is not', this paragraph makes the topic as clear as mud. What is DougB saying here ? There are "real" champagnes and there are "fake" champagnes.



-I know of 2 distinct fakes that are very good, one even was printed using a gold toned pulver to simulate the bronze aging effect.

This is absolutely mind-blowing. A gold toned pulver to simulate the bronze aging effect ?? The deeper DougB takes us down the rabbit hole, the more confused we become. Collectors must come to their own conclusions whether or not that was his exact intention.



-However as I described above it makes identification of them very hard indeed and you need to have an evolved and highly trained eye to spot with definition a real SS NS M42 applied fake from a real one. Anyone saying they can definitively tell a real from a fake from 99% of the photos on forums of these is kidding themselves as these must be in hand and must be magnified.


If it was easy to tell "real" champagnes from "fake" champagnes, we would all be doing it. You see, we need 'an evolved and highly trained eye' to spot the difference between a real-fake and a fake-fake, which we did not have then, but DougB apparently did. Also, we need magnification, which he had elsewhere said he had been using with C-SS and seeing 'fingerprints'. But oddly, he did not see all of the painted faults of C-SS described in the Mythbusting studies until much later.



-Mind you this can be said for any helmet and there is an ET fake decal that will spin your head. I will for this reason never buy an EF M42 SS with an ET decal on it. Those that do are taking a huge risk in my opinion

As mentioned above, I believe this to be a smokescreen, creating more confusion by casting doubt upon authentic decals. EF M42 SS helmets with ET-SS decals have an established application history. They are accepted as period production.


As DougB stirred the pot and made the C-SS issue more and more confusing, collectors were forced to come to him for answers. And these were his answers - more and more confusion making it essentially impossible for collectors to find the truth of the matter. That basically left him alone with the ability to tell 'real' from 'fake', just the way he wanted it.

 

[Niblet]

ok so now I'm really confused,,Doug writes a lengthy synopsis on these c-ss "decals" in 2013 and discusses the variations etc
and doesnt come right out and say they are fake,,,then in 2016 he blows the lid off with a detailed microscopic analysis finally proclaiming once and forall that the C-ss "decals" are painted on forgeries and therefore rubbish.
I realize that I'm a Johnny-come-lately on this subject, and I am still attempting to digest the pages and pages of threads
on this subject on the numerous forums,,I like the way you guys seem to operate over here,,its refreshing

Like I said I only read that article once after it was first published,,so the details are a bit fuzzy.
I have both of Ken N's books and again,,he doesn't come right out and call a spade a spade,,he seems to let the reader draw their
own conclusions,, it was somewhat of a let down IMHO. But I was hoping that someone simply did a cut and paste of DOUGB's
2016 article before he got mad and deleted it,,,Thanks again

 

[M45]

Niblet, so you're "really confused" ?? Congratulations, you're supposed to be. This confusion was intended to drive you to DougB for the answer to the question: is C-SS real, or is C-SS fake ?



-I know the varieties and there are some I believe are fake and will not touch. But this does not mean all NS decals are fake anymore than all Pocher decals are fake or all thin winged KM decals are fake...



So some C-SS are "real" and some C-SS are "fake". But how to tell real from fake ?? DougB says we need 'an evolved and highly trained eye', and we need to use magnification to see the 'fingerprints'.


The question is essentially left there, meaning that only DougB (and maybe a few of his friends) can make such determinations, certainly not the unwashed masses such as ourselves.



DougB's farewell statement to collectors intending to tie everything together and make sense of it all:

-I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. - DougB

 

[Hambone]

I think there are at least two schools of thought on this.

The first, predisposed to think well of DougB, basically says his myth-busting work was ignored, people were passive about it, he became disheartened with the experts, he received pressure from the 'good old boys' not to post his findings, and became discouraged and left.

The second, predisposed to think critical of DougB, basically says that lot# research forced him between a rock and a hard place concerning C-SS, a fraud he had promoted on forums for years. Collectors were becoming wise because C-SS did not fit with any manufacturers decal application patterns. With more and more collectors losing faith in C-SS and thus in its chief promoter DougB, Doug decided to produce a detailed expos-ee of C-SS. While highly detailed and highly informative, he was praised by many, but others wondered why it had taken him so long to finally see all of the painted flaws of C-SS so clearly when he had been looking at C-SS under high magnification for years prior.

No doubt collectors (especially those holding those expensive move props) began to cast a critical eye on Doug, and he probably left to avoid having to explain his many glaring inconsistencies in his previous posts.

Given the general abuse, censorship, and thread locking s that those who dared to question the "Champagne Rune" received at WAF, as shown here, DougB well knew that he could not simply offer an opinion. He had to have it locked down. I think he did that. Even still, the response within the SS lid collecting community was disturbing to me, and IMHO showed me that they simply don't care much, too many "bigwigs" are involved or have "winked" at the fraud, or this level of fraud is acceptable. Certainly, IMHO, at a minimum it shows a disgusting level of "situational ethics" where the "who" is more important than the truth.

I sort things out like this for a living. My view of DougB is very positive and I think highly of his integrity. M45, I think highly of you and your contributions as well to exposing this. However, I don't share your opinions of DougB.

 

[Niblet]

Thank you guys for the replies, so has anyone received any money back from hicks or anyone
regarding these C-SS helmets?

I am going to guess the answer is no,,,and that is absolutely stunning to me,,

 

[M45]

ok so now I'm really confused,,
Like I said I only read that article once after it was first published,,so the details are a bit fuzzy.
I have both of Ken N's books and again,,he doesn't come right out and call a spade a spade,,he seems to let the reader draw their
own conclusions,, it was somewhat of a let down IMHO. But I was hoping that someone simply did a cut and paste of DOUGB's
2016 article before he got mad and deleted it,,,Thanks again

Niblet, I'm very troubled to hear you say that about the new decal book. So it does not come right out and call C-SS a fake, but lets the reader draw their own conclusions ??? There is no legitimate reason for that IMO since C-SS has been shown conclusively to be a template spray-painted on fake. What is the purpose of that ?

Ken N.'s first book had a wishy-washy approach to the topic as well:

-"Also as with the case of Heer helmets, the correlation between helmet producer and SS decal supplier is weaker among NS and SE marked helmets." p.351

The mention of SS helmets with NS and SE marks can only refer to C-SS, but the reference is so vague that C-SS owners might well conclude that such helmets are in fact authentic, while other readers might conclude that C-SS does not exist as it is never mentioned directly by the Champagne name. But Ken N. did say SOMETHING about it. (Just like DougB had said SOMETHING in his synopsis) Once again, as with the helmet book and indeed with DougB's C-SS synopsis, nothing definitive is stated; collectors are left to believe what they choose.

They do their part to prop up the crumbling C-SS house of cards - in this case it has already fallen - and they move on. They did their job.

And these are our helmet book "experts" and "authorities" who are supposed to be leading the hobby ?????????

It sounds like a game is being played on collectors (STILL, believe it or not after all that has happened).

 

[Niblet]

I just re-read the chapter on C-SS in Kens book,,,(page 175-180)
here is what he had to say:

"It is the supposition and strongly held opinion of the authors that the following is true:
The "Champagne Decal" is a post war forgery."

"The Champagne decal" is not a decal at all" It was applied using a process known as "micro painting"


So I guess he is calling them bogus,,,,how can there be any debate? why isnt KH issuing refunds???

 

[M45]

As I recall, the printing of that book was delayed some months after DougB's mythbusting thread broke. [EDIT: Originally slated for a late summer 2015 release, it did not actually come out until early summer 2016.]

I cannot help but wonder about the timing. Was the book printing delayed to revamp the C-SS section after DougB 'blew the lid off' of it ? That would have been embarrassing for the book to be discussing C-SS in positive terms when the lid had already been blown off.

-"The Champagne decal" is not a decal at all" It was applied using a process known as "micro painting"


If that's what the decal book says, it it parroting the mythbusting study that broke this revelation.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding SS decal to shell relationships; Pocher decals are exclusively found on pre-1935 shells of all kinds, a selection of ET M35s factory applied in 1938/39, and on a small variety of other shells mainly as re-issues or as said 2 known factory applications of SE M5s. It is clear this is a contract decal. Q decals are found on Q helmets, period. EF decals are found on EF shells period. ET decals are found on ET shells, however, some have appeared on M42 EF helmets and a small selection of other shells. Why? Nobody knows. For me, I will not touch an EF M42 with an ET decal. I have my reasons and they are not something I want in my collection. Others are fine with them. Thats fine with me as well. NS decals were not found on any other M35s. A reissue transitional follows the same path as the Pocher. Then on M42s in hkp in a same pattern as the M35 NS, and on later model cklM42s. Why were Pochers not used when available as a contract decal used on reissues and in the field (Double runics, reverse runic decaled Police helmets for example)? Why again? Nobody knows. Decal and shell relationship is not a fast and firm rule but it is important enough to pay attention to.



DougB discusses Pocher-SS, Q-SS, ET-SS, and EF-SS decals. Once again, for the 3rd time he casts doubt on M42 EF helmets with ET-SS decal. This is an accepted SS variant. He of all SS collectors should have realized that.

-For me, I will not touch an EF M42 with an ET decal. I have my reasons and they are not something I want in my collection.


-NS decals were not found on any other M35s

He is mistaken here. The TVG M35 with painted C-SS runes and painted party shield is an ET M35.
M35 ET64 4759 DD W/SS CHAMPAGNE 40RAB-WZ/RIVET BS (PW TEMPLATE FRAUD)

edit: also EF and SE M35s.

M35 EF62 3779 DD W/SS RAB PFLG CHAMPANE SS THICK (AIR-BRUSHED POSTWAR)

M35 SE Hicks p.156 CHAMPAGNE-SS (FORMERLY DD HEER OR DD POLICE)

He then discusses C-SS as found on transitionals, hkp M42s, NS M35s, and CKL M42s; no surprise there. His question as to why C-SS were used on these and not the standard Pocher-SS decals becomes almost comical in light of the postwar spray painted C-SS fraud exposure.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding SS decal evolution ; To study SS decals you must study the organization itself. You cannot simply use decal to shell relationships. They were unlike any other organization and to make flaccid and simplified comparisons is cheating yourself of the reality of fact. Any hard core SS collector should have read in detail 3 books on the evolution and history of the SS, The Anatomy of the SS State, The Order of the Deaths Head, and The SS 1919-1945. There are many others but no study on any SS materiel is complete without a read and understanding of these books. That is my solid belief. The SS was a highly evolutionary and complex organization involving political, military, police, security, economic and paramilitary (and other) organizations throughout its history which started in 1919. It was not like any military organization helmet collectors study and thus compare to. You quite simply cannot compare SS collectibles to those of the Wehrmacht in the same context. The closest you can come is the Waffen SS which while they do make up the vast majority of the helmets we collect are not all of the helmets we collect. The SS was unique as it was highly evolutionary throughout its history and because much of the early 1925-1940 it was a generally small organization that was layered by territory. Thus procurement was often done locally and at the unit level extending to helmets and decals. It is quite clear from period photographs that beginning with plain black no decal helmets, to painted insignia, to evolutionary decals and then to the known varieties we most often see.


DougB loses me here when he goes off into his SS history lesson. As I read it, he's saying that you don't know SS history like I do so you don't know SS helmets like I do, so trust me when I say there are real C-SS.


-You cannot simply use decal to shell relationships.

He's minimizing here the importance of factory SS decal to shell relationships; extremely important when studying factory SS decals (and any branch decals). For example: Q-SS decals are found only on Quist helmets. EF-SS decals are found only on EF helmets, etc. By doing so, he justifies this '5th factory SS decal' NS-SS (aka C-SS).

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding rare SS decals; I do not know of anyone who has studied all these in hand outside of Kelly Hicks and myself but it is relevant to the overall study in possibly understanding these NS decals I believe. (You can see my helmets in the Collections Thread). These would be the "SS-VT", the "Fat Runes", the "Nordic", the "Austrian", the "Mirror", the "SD" and the "white on black" variety of which I recently secured a period picture of a similar decal in use. I have an example of each of these on my shelves and have studied them in detail to 200 or 400x magnification, paint, liners,pins, etc. Each of these have a very distinct pattern that I believe without question the NS M35 decal falls into. An early locally made commercial decal for the NS factory. BTW I will say the "Nordic" variety is not a variety at all, I believe it to simply be a Pocher decal that is a triple strike causing it to look "fatter" than normal. I have seen them on other helmets and magnified them, there is no question in my mind they are a simply printing anomaly. As for the "Dutch" variant I have never had this one in hand therefore I cannot comment on it at all. But again, each shows a very unique and distinct application pattern, all have such small sample sizes as its impossible to draw wide conclusions and must be compared carefully. As well, all are believed to be locally/private or "boutique" procured.


DougB is looking at rare SS decals under 200x and 400x magnification and is comparing what he sees to the NS-SS M35 decal (aka C-SS) and believes without question that they all fall into the same distinct patterns. A sloppy template spray painted forgery compared to original stacked celluloid SS decals under 200x and 400x magnification fall into the same distinct patterns ????


-I have an example of each of these on my shelves and have studied them in detail to 200 or 400x magnification, paint, liners,pins, etc. Each of these have a very distinct pattern that I believe without question the NS M35 decal falls into.


He thinks that C-SS was an early locally made commercial DECAL for the NS factory. Why then is C-SS found basically everywhere, on nearly every maker/model of German combat helmet and transitionals if only made for the NS factory very early on ?

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding high (200x-400x) magnification comparisons to other SS decals; The NS decals I have studied under magnification appear generally sharper in print, but do not posses any signs of modern print as far as I can tell. The pulver has a bronze effect and is slightly thinner than on other SS decals. But I have only magnified a small handful compared to 30 or so of Pocher, ET and Q SS decals and a good couple dozen EF. So I am very cautious to draw any conclusions other than there is a fingerprint I have noticed on these at 200 and 400x magnification which is unique. Each SS decal has this unique fingerprint under high magnification as does any Heer, LW or KM decal. In fact, any mass produced printed item made has a unique "fingerprint" at high magnification no matter what it is. Fakes cannot copy to the 200 and 400x magnification level, it is that simple.


IMO one of the most incriminating paragraphs.

-The NS decals I have studied under magnification appear generally sharper in print, but do not posses any signs of modern print as far as I can tell.

What the hell is this supposed to mean ? Sharper in print ? What about those fuzzy lines where spray went underneath templates ?


-The pulver has a bronze effect and is slightly thinner than on other SS decals.

There is no 'pulver'. It is paint ! Of course they look thinner. This was mentioned way back in 2006 that they had a sprayed-on look to them.


-So I am very cautious to draw any conclusions other than there is a fingerprint I have noticed on these at 200 and 400x magnification which is unique.

Remember, DougB is the 'expert' who is in the know and is relating to us his 'research' about C-SS. He never tells us what this 'fingerprint' is. Why not ? He would have had to tell us about all of the painted flaws exhibited by C-SS. He certainly was not going to do that, at least not then. He was still in the 'promotional phase' at this time. He didn't want to say anything to shake collector faith in these things. DougB was walking a tight-rope with C-SS. He had to be cautious about what he said about them. He had to prop up the shaky house of cards (build faith in C-SS) without it looking too obvious, all the while being careful not to say anything that would rattle collector confidence or make him appear incompetent.


-In fact, any mass produced printed item made has a unique "fingerprint" at high magnification no matter what it is. Fakes cannot copy to the 200 and 400x magnification level, it is that simple.

This last sentence is telling. If fakes cannot copy to the 200-400x magnification, then how did a sloppy spray painted forgery (C-SS) fool him ? He said it was that simple.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

Regarding rumour of the NS decal; Terry has spoken at length about the dealer who had sheets of "second pattern" decals he was applying to no decal M40 and M42 helmets. This would be therefore ET or NS decals. There are a tremendous amount of dead mint M40 and M42 ET SS helmets with ET decals out there unnamed with no clear provenance just as there are a lot of dead mint M42 ckl SS sporting NS decals unnamed with no clear provenance. I am cautious of any dead mint no provenance SS helmet in particular M40 and M42's for these reasons that no decal helmets were fitted with decals of all sorts postwar. This is why my collection consists of M35s and battle worn or named M40 and M42 SS helmets or helmets with some long history of collector pedigree. I have also heard the rumours from old collectors that these NS decals were made in New York as fakes. Certainly there is truth to the rumour because as I said earlier these decals, like all SS decals, are heavily faked. Because of the small sample size, it becomes difficult to know real from fake for the collector who has not had hands on these helmets before. A concern is the decals found on the majority of the ckl helmets are a wide variety of lot numbers, all are near mint, all have no provenance I am aware of, and none are named or unit marked. Fake, or real and postwar applied? As for unapplied SS decals, I have owned several Pochers, know of a few ET's. Never have I seen an unapplied NS, Q or EF nor have I ever heard of them being available from collectors decades ago. Mind you then it was "first" and "second" pattern but still, those decals if applied would be on a wide variety of helmets today and they are not. Yet I have experienced the top end fake Pocher unapplied as well as a Q. I have seen the ET and NS fakes unapplied. There isnt a good fake of the EF yet. So if there were sheets of unapplied or faked decals, I would think there might be some out there. Who knows.



DougB's choice of SS helmets mentioned here (M35s, battle worn/named M40-M42s w/history) did not help him avoid the template spray painted C-SS fake. C-SS, found on M35s (NS, ET) and on his 'vet acquired' hkp M42s that he prized as authentic, only demonstrates how faulty his logic was, certainly not that such helmets were authentic.

-I am cautious of any dead mint no provenance SS helmet in particular M40 and M42's for these reasons that no decal helmets were fitted with decals of all sorts postwar. This is why my collection consists of M35s and battle worn or named M40 and M42 SS helmets or helmets with some long history of collector pedigree.



-I have also heard the rumours from old collectors that these NS decals were made in New York as fakes. Certainly there is truth to the rumour because as I said earlier these decals, like all SS decals, are heavily faked.

And while DougB admits some C-SS could have been produced postwar, his admission is limited in that since all SS decals have been faked postwar, it stands to reason there are "fake" C-SS and "authentic" C-SS.



-Because of the small sample size, it becomes difficult to know real from fake for the collector who has not had hands on these helmets before.

What the small sample size really means (re: the NS M35 with C-SS) is that these few helmets upon which this C-SS authenticity is largely based have only been examined by a privileged few, not the average joe collector. A very few helmets examined by a very few privileged "experts" upon which is based the discovery of a new SS "decal variant" spells trouble for anyone purchasing these as authentic. Telling "real from fake" C-SS is "difficult" for the average joe collector who has not been able to even examine them.

-....because on the NS M35 they are distinct, appear on 1938 marked shells painted exactly the same using NS party decals. There are only a small handful (9 are recorded by Kelly I think, I have recorded 5). They are all identical in every respect primarily D shells in a tight cluster of lot numbers. 3 are named, 2 are fully researched.

We now know that all of that "expert" research and "vet procurement" concerning C-SS is completely faulty.



-A concern is the decals found on the majority of the ckl helmets are a wide variety of lot numbers, all are near mint, all have no provenance I am aware of, and none are named or unit marked. Fake, or real and postwar applied?

I believe that collector concern over the large numbers of CKL M42s with C-SS in no-decal territory was one of the main reasons for DougB's synopsis. He was supposed to answer collector's questions. But his statement above only shows that he will make no definitive statement about authenticity either way. A very safe card for him to play if walking a tight-rope.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

My study principals; With my study on SS decals I have tried to avoid what I call "collector myth" propagated mainly by forums and rumour and rumour of rumour. There is no question forums have assisted in the study and furthered the collective knowledge out there but there is no question forums do much to propagate rumour, half truths, outright lies, and total ********. Ego, agendas, greed, friendships, paranoia and other human traits and fallibilities make in general forums today maybe one of the worst places to study. This forum we try to have indepth discussion but we are not the same forum we used to be try as we might, and the past few years these discussions often get derailed for the reasons I mention above and I have quit getting involved in them as they have become a waste of time, hard on my blood pressure and I have to moderate them anyway so guys don't freak out and kill each other. But I have begun to think that forums in general have served their purpose. It is more about possession and ego today than study and maybe thats the way it always has been but in the early days of this forum it was truly a place of respect, sharing and for studious collectors to push the knowledge envelope. In any case, I digress, collectors are about possessing, and thats cool. But mere possession doesn't equate to knowledge, so long as we remember that I suppose.


It is astounding to me the gall that DougB had to talk about "collector myth" when he had been promoting a template spray painted postwar fake for years on forums. It was on forums where collectors began to question the wisdom of the so-called SS helmet "experts" and began unraveling the twisted tale of the sham-pain ruins. Now that collectors had begun to question DougB's wisdom and not simply believe everything he said like mindless sheep, forums were now the enemy to Doug. He largely stopped posting because he could not provide sufficient answers to collectors about the C-SS fake.

-....there is no question forums do much to propagate rumour, half truths, outright lies, and total ********. Ego, agendas, greed, friendships, paranoia and other human traits and fallibilities make in general forums today maybe one of the worst places to study. This forum we try to have indepth discussion but we are not the same forum we used to be try as we might, and the past few years these discussions often get derailed for the reasons I mention above and I have quit getting involved in them as they have become a waste of time,


-But I have begun to think that forums in general have served their purpose

That's right Doug, let's get rid of forums altogether. That way, collectors will have no means to publicly question your highly dubious "research".

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

-A real study can only be done with hands on many many samples of these helmets, not only exclusively from photos or books and telephone calls and stolen pics from the net. Recording the observations of helmets when in hand and the pertinent facts then into a database to do comparables is critical, looking for patterns and distinction and anomalies. I have drawn on my sons experience on hypothesis and conclusion and how they go about proper scientific analytical study. (he is an actual scientist getting his doctorate in molecular genetics so he knows proper methods of which I speak) and I have drawn from commercial industry specifically commercial printing, where I have a background in my former career as a commercial artist and I have a close friend who ran a fluid analysis company that used high magnification in the study of particles found in fluid for the oilfield industry (it can save a $250,000 thousand dollar engine or prevent the loss of a couple hundred million dollar per day shutdown of a plant so these guys must get it right).


-M35 NS; - Champagne decals; I prefer to call them NS decals. Why, because on the NS M35 they are distinct, appear on 1938 marked shells painted exactly the same using NS party decals. There are only a small handful (9 are recorded by Kelly I think, I have recorded 5). They are all identical in every respect primarily D shells in a tight cluster of lot numbers. 3 are named, 2 are fully researched. I own one of the named and researched ones (It was formerly a GHW helmet of the year) and have held in my hands to study 2 others.

-Because of the small sample size, it becomes difficult to know real from fake for the collector who has not had hands on these helmets before.



Let me see if I get this straight. One of the pillars supporting Doug's claim of C-SS authenticity was that the 'NS-SS DECAL' is found on 'only a small handful' of NS M35 helmets with the same features. Their near identical features have apparently convinced Doug that C-SS was period. Elsewhere he discusses the "small sample size" of these helmets making it difficult for the average collector to tell "real" from "fake".

Then in this paragraph he tells us A real study can only be done with hands on many many samples of these helmets.

That would mean that the "expert's" proclamations of C-SS authenticity based on only a small handful of helmets is not a real study at all, because a real study can only be done with hands on of many many samples of these helmets.

I wholeheartedly agree; The C-SS "research" by Kelly and DougB claiming C-SS authenticity was NEVER a real study.

 

[M45]

From Post#134 Doug's C-SS synopsis continues:

-To do a proper analysis one must have no agenda and the ability to directly challenge the conventional wisdom, and share these results with other like minded people for balanced feedback. This is what I have tried to do with my SS decal study. I dont care who owned a helmet before me or what a book says or what a forum says. I go with what I have seen and studied with my own eyes. I do respect what is written in books but remembering that the study of these is always continuing and evolving. A book does not represent a finish line by any means or the world would still be flat and dinosaurs would be lizards who lived in swamps to support their weight if they did. In fact, much of what is written on the subject of collecting in the past is pretty much obsolete today. Just like this thread, it will be obsolete when something new or unknown comes along. And like my knowledge, it continues to evolve but I have in my mind studied enough to make some definitive conclusions here and there and at worst, it guides me on making purchase decisions without consultation and for my complete comfort, no one else's.


-To do a proper analysis one must have no agenda and the ability to directly challenge the conventional wisdom,


Can you believe this man, the one who confronted, harassed (with profanity) censored, sanitized, deleted posts and banned people for disputing his claims that C-SS was a "textbook decal"

now telling us one must have "no agenda" and the ability to directly challenge the conventional wisdom to do a proper analysis ??

When DougB banned people for disagreeing with him, he nullified their ability to directly challenge the conventional wisdom (aka Dougb's claims that C-SS was authentic). Therefore by DougB making much opposition disappear from his forum, he prevented a proper analysis of C-SS from being conducted. This was how the C-SS myth was able to survive for so long.

 

[Niblet]

hmmmm very interesting read, I appreciate the time M45 has put into this, hats off!
you too hambone,,I'm still not done reading this thread but I can appreciate the thought process here
Keep up the good work all!