Why does every thread here devolve into a "Real" vs. "Replica" argument?

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by Al G

It also references them as genuine. Why do you always leave that part out?

Excellent question. Here are my reasons:

1. I know the word "authentic" is used once, one time, when referring to the modern CSX replicas, but I can't remember "genuine" specifically being used, but I could be wrong.

2. Evan does a fantastic job of telling everyone that the modern CSX replicas are real genuine Shelby Cobras. But he never mentions the references in the Registry to "true replica" or "Cobra-like." So I feel the other references must be presented from Registry.

3. "Genuine replica" is an oxymoron, similar to the old joke "military intelligence." So, logically I disagree with the word "genuine" being used when referring to the modern CSX replicas, because logically a replica cannot be genuine.

4. Ned Scudder, the one of the leading historians of the genuine Shelby Cobras and the SAAC Cobra Registrar, has said for some time now, not just in this thread (see above), but in a much older thread, that the modern CSX Cobras are replicas. So, the word "genuine" when referring to the modern CSX replicas, is not correct.

5. The next Registry may change the terminology around the modern CSX replicas, since according to Ned, the "sensitivities" between SAAC and SA/CSBI no longer exist as they did back in the mid-2000's when the Registry was being written. Reading between the lines, it sounds to me like the language used for the modern CSX replicas in the Registry was neutered. I believe Ned words were that SAAC couldn't call "a spade a spade."