Alleged Screen Used Hero TOS Phaser up for auction (now the aftermath)

Wow, you think I'm that good do you? (lol)


Because of its elongation characteristics compared with brass or 302 half hard stainless steel. two step is not "pretty much standard" as it is up tp customer specifications and supplied art work as to whether one, two, three, or even four stepped etchings. But (he says with tongue firmly planted in cheek) you already knew that.



Yeah right! Why make it about the guy questioning the professed skills of the few on here to correctly give an opinion about something about to sell at auction for possibly 7 figures and where we can seriously impact and curb it's sale's potential? " Yeah! Let's all just gang up on him"... or are you all that much in denial abnout what you are doing?
To be fair, for an adult, you aren't half milking the victim card here.

You're not really adding anything of real substance, actually rather the opposite. Which is to say that unfortunately you are doing an effective job of continuing to drag this thread down to a level that is tedious in the extreme.
 
Yeah right! Why make it about the guy questioning the professed skills of the few on here to correctly give an opinion about something about to sell at auction for possibly 7 figures and where we can seriously impact and curb it's sale's potential? " Yeah! Let's all just gang up on him"... or are you all that much in denial abnout what you are doing?
Your first post in this discussion from page one, post #7.

"I am not out to deliberately embarrass anyone on here but I find some of these comments patently absurd."

This is your first entry into this discussion and you come out attacking. Your post is rife with condescension, sarcasm and opinion, not fact.

"Have any of you ever worked on so much as one actual "Hollywood" production?"

You italicized the word [one] to denote what exactly?

"by your own comments, it appears you are all experts"

Please re-read this and tell me that it isn't sarcasm. Defensive sarcasm at that.

"I do "wonder" about that! (Not!)"

More defensive sarcasm.

"you are all going on and on about insignificant external minutiae"

Here you are setting up for your control of the narrative.

"not one of you commented on how the internal operating mechanisms are virtually identical"

There we have it, your attempt to control the narrative. To guide the discussion to the center of your belief it is an original, because you believe the forum conclusion will match that of your own.

"Are you absolutely certain you know what you are saying here Robn1?"

More blatant sarcasm with a tinge of condescension.

"and you know this Robn1 from personally handling these things?"

You ask this with a level in incredulity worthy of a Romulan.

"Again with the "cripsy", it's probably time to lay off all the fries and potato chips guys."

This was meant as sarcasm but only revealed just how little you know of the prop, the vernacular used in describing the various components and the collective community that holds this prop in high regard.

"But this comment is simply too much for me to bear Alley"

Here you have completely dismissed another forum member as not being entitled to an observation or opinion, yet for your first post into this thread, you are okay with this.

"I get a distinct feeling that you guys have some deep seated fear, that according multiple known and true expert opinion(s) of those retained by the (not in-expert) people themselves at Heritage Auctions, and after lengthy physical examination that this actually is a genuine, filmed Star Trek Phaser prop. "

Why? because the forum opinion doesn't align with yours? It seems as though you are taking the opinions of the first 6 posts very personal and that is in and of itself, worth closer scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
I know your post is mostly tongue in cheek though I’m sure many see Highliner‘s posts just that way.
I see it a little different. I feel that his posts are genuine…to HIM. The way I see it, the guy definitely runs in the proper circles and is quite knowledgeable. Hey may even have been called upon to validate items. Many might even call him a specialist in his field (though to what degree I do not know nor care). His reputation is on the line here, kids. The reason he’s fighting so hard is because (to him) the piece is genuine.Without that, his reputation is in question and there will never be be the irrefutable proof that this phaser is 100 percent authentic.

"However, if there is a known group of specialists (so who exactly are these known and unamed "specialists'?) out there saying he is incorrect, then the item is not genuine, we are hurting his reputation. How many times does he scream that he demands to know why we won’t admit that is real? You see, he NEEDS the RPF approval." Sorry but nah. I've already used the "Stinking Badges" comment, and you all attack yet refuse to accredit those you point to for guidance (Landru). Ha!

Like the majority of you I am doing this genuine nonsense to a great measure just for the entertainment value of it. And that ruffles the feathers of those of you on here who know they don't know much about the actual doing of these things. Is that wrong?... Nope!

I do enjoy all the posturing and defensive commenting of the rather large poser segment on here, those who don't do any of this type of work.

But seriously, there is the potential of actual damage to the auction value of this item. By claiming some group of "bona-fides experts" say it's a fake, you people actually are exposing all involved to a possible action. Not by me, but by H.A. try to be honest about this. I saw that as not one of you are aware of the paper trail legacy involved here where and with who(m) (lol) the elements of this item originated. It is quite clear it is real from just that alone.


Then there's this:
A truly capable person will note by using only the third image in the opening post of this thread, the displayed compound contours of that Phaser from that high angle 3/4 view photograph it proves it is indeed real. Not one of you has commented on the visible and numerous compound curves and the incredible difficulty of matching those precise concave and convex compound curves. Not one of the replica phasers made to date possess these subtle nuances of for. Each and every one of you has missed this essentially fingerprint of authenticity..


Like the majority of you I am doing this genuine nonsense to a great measure just for the entertainment value of it. And that ruffles the feathers of those of you on here who know they don't know much about the actual doing of these things. Is that wrong?... Nope!

I do enjoy all the posturing and defensive commenting of the rather large poser segment on here, those who don't do any of this type of work.

But seriously, there is the potential of actual damage to the auction value of this item. By claiming some group of "bona-fides experts" say it's a fake, you people actually are exposing all involved to a possible action. Not by me, but by H.A. try to be honest about this. I saw that as not one of you are aware of the paper trail legacy involved here where and with who(m) (lol) the elements of this item originated. It is quite clear it is real from just that alone.


Then there's this:
A truly capable person will note by using only the third image in the opening post of this thread, the displayed compound contours of that Phaser from that high angle 3/4 view photograph it proves it is indeed real. Not one of you has commented on the visible and numerous compound curves and the incredible difficulty of matching those precise concave and convex compound curves. Not one of the replica phasers made to date possess these subtle nuances of for. Each and every one of you has missed this essentially fingerprint of authenticity..

What old school shade tree ??? is that supposed to be? Have you done anything relevant? anything not from the bronze age?
It would look like this, on silk screened PCB assembled by a pick 'n place machine and looking like it came from your Playstation rather than a prop. I blacked out a few details, sorry.

View attachment 1467029
Not impressed for obvious reasons as it is off the shelf techniques and circuitry.
 
To be fair, for an adult, you aren't half milking the victim card here.

You're not really adding anything of real substance, actually rather the opposite. Which is to say that unfortunately you are doing an effective job of continuing to drag this thread down to a level that is tedious in the extreme.
For that first comment thank you for noticing. For the second regarding substance, I see it has all escaped you. Maybe you'd benefit by going back to the beginning and read again?
 
Your first post in this discussion from page one, post #7.

"I am not out to deliberately embarrass anyone on here but I find some of these comments patently absurd."

This is your first entry into this discussion and you come out attacking. Your post is rife with condescension, sarcasm and opinion, not fact.

"Have any of you ever worked on so much as one actual "Hollywood" production?"

You italicized the word [one] to denote what exactly?

"by your own comments, it appears you are all experts"

Please re-read this and tell me that it isn't sarcasm. Defensive sarcasm at that.

"I do "wonder" about that! (Not!)"

More defensive sarcasm.

"you are all going on and on about insignificant external minutiae"

Here you are setting up for your control of the narrative.

"not one of you commented on how the internal operating mechanisms are virtually identical"

There we have it, your attempt to control the narrative. To guide the discussion to the center of your belief it is an original, because you believe the forum conclusion will match that of your own.

"Are you absolutely certain you know what you are saying here Robn1?"

More blatant sarcasm with a tinge of condescension.

"and you know this Robn1 from personally handling these things?"

You ask this with a level in incredulity worthy of a Romulan.

"Again with the "cripsy", it's probably time to lay off all the fries and potato chips guys."

This was meant as sarcasm but only revealed just how little you know of the prop, the vernacular used in describing the various components and the collective community that holds this prop in high regard.

"But this comment is simply too much for me to bear Alley"

Here you have completely dismissed another forum member as not being entitled to an observation or opinion, yet for your first post into this thread, you are okay with this.

"I get a distinct feeling that you guys have some deep seated fear, that according multiple known and true expert opinion(s) of those retained by the (not in-expert) people themselves at Heritage Auctions, and after lengthy physical examination that this actually is a genuine, filmed Star Trek Phaser prop. "

Why? because the forum opinion doesn't align with yours? It seems as though you are taking the opinions of the first 6 posts very personal and that in and of itself is worth an examin

Why is the collective childish behavior here entirely ignored (Group Think), while all of you simply (and in error) attack my point of view which in due time you will find out is the correct and accurate statement of fact? These responses truly are kid's stuff.

If any of you find that response offensive, it is obvious as to why. And once again, I am correct.

Your first post in this discussion from page one, post #7.

"I am not out to deliberately embarrass anyone on here but I find some of these comments patently absurd."

This is your first entry into this discussion and you come out attacking. Your post is rife with condescension, sarcasm and opinion, not fact.

"Have any of you ever worked on so much as one actual "Hollywood" production?"

You italicized the word [one] to denote what exactly?

"by your own comments, it appears you are all experts"

Please re-read this and tell me that it isn't sarcasm. Defensive sarcasm at that.

"I do "wonder" about that! (Not!)"

More defensive sarcasm.

"you are all going on and on about insignificant external minutiae"

Here you are setting up for your control of the narrative.

"not one of you commented on how the internal operating mechanisms are virtually identical"

There we have it, your attempt to control the narrative. To guide the discussion to the center of your belief it is an original, because you believe the forum conclusion will match that of your own.

"Are you absolutely certain you know what you are saying here Robn1?"

More blatant sarcasm with a tinge of condescension.

"and you know this Robn1 from personally handling these things?"

You ask this with a level in incredulity worthy of a Romulan.

"Again with the "cripsy", it's probably time to lay off all the fries and potato chips guys."

This was meant as sarcasm but only revealed just how little you know of the prop, the vernacular used in describing the various components and the collective community that holds this prop in high regard.

"But this comment is simply too much for me to bear Alley"

Here you have completely dismissed another forum member as not being entitled to an observation or opinion, yet for your first post into this thread, you are okay with this.

"I get a distinct feeling that you guys have some deep seated fear, that according multiple known and true expert opinion(s) of those retained by the (not in-expert) people themselves at Heritage Auctions, and after lengthy physical examination that this actually is a genuine, filmed Star Trek Phaser prop. "

Why? because the forum opinion doesn't align with yours? It seems as though you are taking the opinions of the first 6 posts very personal and that is in and of itself, worth closer scrutiny.
What a court-room attorney you are! Now that is an example of true sarcasm, and not those things you claim to be.
 
I think Funky nailed it. I think you validated this for Heritage. Quite possibly as the sole person to do so. If word were to get back to Heritage that your analysis may have been in error, your reputation and certainly your fee would be in jeopardy. You behave as someone with something to lose. You write as someone taking the opinions presented here very personal.
 
Y'know it's actually more fun reading everyone's replies to Highliners' comments (since I've long since ignored him, of course) and trying to guess and what insults and nonsense he's spewing than it would be to just read his posts.

And it appears that he's still commenting on and addressing my own posts, even though I cannot see or read his own (nor do I have any desire to).


This ain't rocket science. A questionable piece which bucks many known details. Questionable provenance. Not many answers. People giving their valid (and often highly-informed) opinions.

I'd be over the moon if another genuine TOS hero phaser was discovered, but I don't believe this to be the case. And yet, certain persons can't seem to handle that. You know, little things like critical thinking and freedom of speech. You'd think STAR TREK fans would be more open-minded and tolerant.

Did this guy think he was in an STD or AbramsTREK thread, or something? Behavior like his would be a more natural fit, in that case.
 
I have repeatedly noticed when the points I make about valid proof re: this Phaser being real, that proof is then ignored, and denied and the ad-hominem kid's gang swiftly re-appears.

Can any of you refute the proof as I have stated on here? Any of you?

As for the guy with the CAD renderings of that mini hand-vacuum and hand held 1980's TV, what 3D CAD programs did you use and again are these rendered as STL or IGS files or did you use NURBS? Do you know how to get a NURB (a wet noodle) to accurately create a desired contour? I could show you and you might (but I'd sincerely doubt it) learn from what techniques I have developed over the last 24 years.
 
I have repeatedly noticed when the points I make about valid proof re: this Phaser being real, that proof is then ignored, and denied and the ad-hominem kid's gang swiftly re-appears.

Can any of you refute the proof as I have stated on here? Any of you?

As for the guy with the CAD renderings of that mini hand-vacuum and hand held 1980's TV, what 3D CAD programs did you use and again are these rendered as STL or IGS files or did you use NURBS? Do you know how to get a NURB (a wet noodle) to accurately create a desired contour? I could show you and you might (but I'd sincerely doubt it) learn from what techniques I have developed over the last 24 years.
I take everything I said back, I know why you are here! You're here for the jokes!

Did you just call the TNG Dustbuster ---a mini hand vacuum? You made a double entendre! Surely it was for the comedic value!
 
I think Funky nailed it. I think you validated this for Heritage. Quite possibly as the sole person to do so. If word were to get back to Heritage that your analysis may have been in error, your reputation and certainly your fee would be in jeopardy. You behave as someone with something to lose. You write as someone taking the opinions presented here very personal.
No, I did not.

There were three individuals involved and they are all above reproach. All of you, each and every single one of you is ion effect saying:

"You (I) have 'this or that' to lose here" It is you people, collectively as in a group that are attempting what is known as "Face Saving".

All of you have a deep rooted fear (as you should) that I may well be correct and the lot of you will be embarrassed by that truth's coming out.

It is all of you who are losing face by my comments and therefore have something to lose, and you are subconsciously aware of this as inicated by the use of Freudian Projection, claiming what you are as a group in fear of, is what I am then in fear of.

As I have too often said, I do know this is the real thing, meaning yes I do have "inside information". Information that I will not reveal. But also I have shown to anyone with an genuinely open mind, several actual proofs of my claim and that the arguments posed by your side are essentially worthless.

An adult would agree with the above comment being possible, if not probable. I expect to find no takers for either of those positions on this website.

I take everything I said back, I know why you are here! You're here for the jokes!

Did you just call the TNG Dustbuster ---a mini hand vacuum? You made a double entendre! Surely it was for the comedic value!
Eureka you found it! That elusive aspect of my humor!

As I said I am on here in part for the entertainment value!

Y'know it's actually more fun reading everyone's replies to Highliners' comments (since I've long since ignored him, of course) and trying to guess and what insults and nonsense he's spewing than it would be to just read his posts.

And it appears that he's still commenting on and addressing my own posts, even though I cannot see or read his own (nor do I have any desire to).


This ain't rocket science. A questionable piece which bucks many known details. Questionable provenance. Not many answers. People giving their valid (and often highly-informed) opinions.

I'd be over the moon if another genuine TOS hero phaser was discovered, but I don't believe this to be the case. And yet, certain persons can't seem to handle that. You know, little things like critical thinking and freedom of speech. You'd think STAR TREK fans would be more open-minded and tolerant.

Did this guy think he was in an STD or AbramsTREK thread, or something? Behavior like his would be a more natural fit, in that case.
Sosad... I will so enjoy listening to all the throngs of sobbing on here when the truth is revealed and it soon will be so....
 

Now that is funny. Also very revealing about you.
But that observation is correct and you haven't denied that it is correct.

Mods, please lock this thread.
"Mods, please lock this thread." For you to make thaty request, what is it that scares you? Is it my having been sincere, honest and with a measure of humor, entertaining from the beginning, or is it that I have been and am correct and that those on here who continually insist this is a "fake" will be irrefutably proven wrong?
 
As I have too often said, I do know this is the real thing, meaning yes I do have "inside information". Information that I will not reveal.

So, everyone else is presenting evidence that can help make up a person's mind. But you say we should make up our minds on evidence that you have and helped you make up your mind, but we're supposed to take this evidence into account without it being presented. If this evidence you are withholding is so persuasive, how can you expect us to come to the same conclusion without it. And NO, if you want to withhold it, you do not have to show it. But you can not also expect us to take into consideration.
 
For that first comment thank you for noticing. For the second regarding substance, I see it has all escaped you. Maybe you'd benefit by going back to the beginning and read again?
I have read this entire thread from it's informative and enjoyable beginnings, to the utter slow motion car crash you have successfully caused it to be.

I am frankly appalled by the behaviour you have exhibited within this thread.

Mods, please lock this thread.
I second this motion whole heartedly. A thoroughly decent thread has been ruined.
 
Y'all should stop responding to this tool. Ask yourselves why he keeps replying to a bunch of folk whose opinion he cares so little about. He's either afraid of those opinions and how they will affect his sale (in which case he is giving you guys far more legitimacy than he's admitting to) or he's simply trolling. Either way, he's getting what he wants. Better to ignore him as at the start of this thread. We all saw how that went down ;)
 
Sosad... I will so enjoy listening to all the throngs of sobbing on here when the truth is revealed.

So, everyone else is presenting evidence that can help make up a person's mind. But you say we should make up our minds on evidence that you have and helped you make up your mind, but we're supposed to take this evidence into account without it being presented. If this evidence you are withholding is so persuasive, how can you expect us to come to the same conclusion without it. And NO, if you want to withhold it, you do not have to show it. But you can not also expect us to take into consideration.
Evidence As Presented:

1) Observe and note the compound curves the contours in image 3 #1 post. Show me any replica that has captured those elusive curves.

2) Why has no one mentioned the interior interchangeability of components.

3) The paint is 52 years old and paint oxidizes and deteriorates, yet matches when seen in one's hand and equal weights in one's hand.

4) That the grips functionally plug into each-other, impossible if made separately.

And a lot more.

Y'all should stop responding to this tool. Ask yourselves why he keeps replying to a bunch of folk whose opinion he cares so little about. He's either afraid of those opinions and how they will affect his sale (in which case he is giving you guys far more legitimacy than he's admitting to) or he's simply trolling. Either way, he's getting what he wants. Better to ignore him as at the start of this thread. We all saw how that went down ;)
You guys are going to be so embarrassed by your own closed-mindedness.
 
I have read this entire thread from it's informative and enjoyable beginnings, to the utter slow motion car crash you have successfully caused it to be.

I am frankly appalled by the behaviour you have exhibited within this thread.


I second this motion whole heartedly. A thoroughly decent thread has been ruined.
YES! Close this thread I agree!

This thread has been "ruined" because a person (myself) who actually knows the truth has outed all of you as a group think conglomerate of negative posers, who en-masse don't know all that much but wish they did.


The best parts were when he had voluntarily stopped posting.
Now that says a great deal about yourself sir.
 
Y'all should stop responding to this tool. Ask yourselves why he keeps replying to a bunch of folk whose opinion he cares so little about. He's either afraid of those opinions and how they will affect his sale (in which case he is giving you guys far more legitimacy than he's admitting to) or he's simply trolling. Either way, he's getting what he wants. Better to ignore him as at the start of this thread. We all saw how that went down ;)


Exactly. This can still be a useful thread. Just ignore the nonsense. That's what I did when things started going downhill. I'm still more than happy to have civil discourse with people who have differing opinions on this piece. Those who are unable to act civilly--and use this thread to project their own apparent hang-ups onto anyone and everyone else--should simply be ignored.

Frankly, only someone who is legitimately mentally ill or has a vested interest in the outcome of this auction would have a reason to get so emotional about it. There is absolutely no call for attacks, insults, or bitter arguments, here. Spirited debate? Sure. Agreeing to disagree? Absolutely. But not spewing accusations and demanding that people present their Prop Expert ID cards.
 

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top