LOL!, I loved your response. Honestly I don't care if the deposit proves out more than 6M. But let's not get into debate over semantics. Perhaps you would like to give the "legal" description of the terms "Proven, Indicated & Inferred. It would be a great benefit to the thread as it's been many months since the distinctions were outlined, or I missed the post.
As the May 22nd release states, "In Paravicini's report he calculates a proven reserve of 6,430,000 troy ounces of gold; indicated resources of 78,714,000 troy ounces; and inferred resources of 157,428,000 troy ounces."
If I understand the term "Proven" it appears that Guido did just what you claim you wanted, which is that the "Proven" be proven in steps. He didn't claim that the 157M is proven, it'll take quite a few steps and millions of dollars to prove or disprove that amount.
It appears to me that you have offered enough criticism of Guido's conclusions to indicate that it is almost certainly fraudulent. If this is not what you believe I offer my apologies right now for the misunderstanding. Perhaps if the "Proven" proves true you will consider it dumb luck on Guido's part. I just don't know.
I appreciate your shared knowledge, concerns and tempered debate.
Cheers, Jon |
