Stetson Sweat Stamps/ LOT XXXX

[jlee562]

Far from being a far reach for certainty, it's just the opposite- it's the closest thing to certainty.

Not really, no.

As long as we are wildly theorizing, it's equally possible Stetson sold components.

Add me to the skeptics list. There certainly are things accepted as general wisdom without 100% verifiable proof, but there's not enough here for me to say that this is one of them. More research needed.

 

[MikeinRome]

Not really, no.

As long as we are wildly theorizing, it's equally possible Stetson sold components.

Add me to the skeptics list. There certainly are things accepted as general wisdom without 100% verifiable proof, but there's not enough here for me to say that this is one of them. More research needed.

This is just another attempt to explain away the evidence staring you in the face. Or that's how it seems to me.

 

[jlee562]

This is just another attempt to explain away the evidence staring you in the face. Or that's how it seems to me.

Why is my explanation less logical than yours? Please, detail the evidence as to why it is more likely that the whole hat was manufactured rather than just the sweatband. If you can't show that your claim is more likely than mine, we should not consider it as such. Both are possible explanations for the appearance of lot numbers in non Stetson hats. For that matter, it's also possible the lot number originates from a supplier. Stetson had to get the leather from somewhere. Proving something is true also involves disproving alternative explanations. You simply have not done that, you hand wave it away and pretend we're the ones being irrational.

Your "evidence" is just your hunch. Actual evidence would be Stetson manufacturer tags. Why would they use the same identification system on just the sweatbands and not other parts of the hat? Actual evidence would be documentation showing hats ordered or hats shipped.

 

[MikeinRome]

Why is my explanation less logical than yours? Please, detail the evidence as to why it is more likely that the whole hat was manufactured rather than just the sweatband. If you can't show that your claim is more likely than mine, we should not consider it as such. Both are possible explanations for the appearance of lot numbers in non Stetson hats. For that matter, it's also possible the lot number originates from a supplier. Stetson had to get the leather from somewhere. Proving something is true also involves disproving alternative explanations. You simply have not done that, you hand wave it away and pretend we're the ones being irrational.

Your "evidence" is just your hunch. Actual evidence would be Stetson manufacturer tags. Why would they use the same identification system on just the sweatbands and not other parts of the hat? Actual evidence would be documentation showing hats ordered or hats shipped.

I started to add to my reply to you that it was going to be my final remark on this topic. And so it is. It's a waste of time, I can clearly see.

 

[RossRYoung]

Well said Jared.

This is not the first, and most certainly won’t be the last of the unsubstantiated claims. I’d even go as far as saying is ruining the credibility of all the work done before. At least for those not willing to dig deep enough through the old posts and threads.

 

[Bamaboots]

"evidence"

This. This is all anyone has asked for. I’ve gone over that hat, sweat , lot number and all related posts ad nauseam. Now granted, my entire career revolved around evidence and perhaps I’m jaded or even cynical at times but all I’ve seen is a lot number that looks like the one on Stetson hats from a certain era. Maybe it’s exactly the same, I don’t know. Even if it is, the gap from lot # to Stetson is so wide that such assumptions never occur to me. And the thought that someone with nothing more to offer as evidence would be so insistent, occurs to me even less.

@RossRYoung. I don’t think there is any doubt in what you say.