To: Thor Carlsen who wrote (12950 ) 3/10/2000 5:32:00 AM From: d:oug Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 14226
Thor, I don't know if Chuca is still holding his gpgi shares, but in the spirit of eyes wide open and walking the talk with that which included identification of between the lines stuff so that later it will not seem that I only told an 1/2 talk for a complete walk. So, about 4 weeks ago I did a buy of 15,000 HABE shares so that after us hurting shareholders regain control of this company we will instruct the new management team to immediatly contact this company, and without delay offer aJoining so that the Haber Gold Process can obtain a cash flow for our and their company, in the exchanging gold for cash. The extraction of the other precious metals of Global's dirt will then proceed from the strength of an actual gold mining company with a cash flow and strong valuation of stock price. Not needed for I to speculate into this Haber Science company for this event I outlined to happen, but it does add substance to thought. Feb 25 - Company Update - Romanian Cyanida Spill & EMP Patent Protection Haber, Inc. 470 Main Road, Towaco, NJ, USA ph:(973) 263-0990 fx:(973) 263-9296 On January 30, 2000 there was a tragic cyanide spill at the Baia Mare gold mine in northwestern Romania. It has been referred to as Europe's worst environmental disaster since Chernobyl. The polluted water flowed west into Hungary and then to Yugoslavia. The poison destroyed virtually all aquatic life in the Tisa River before entering the Danube, Serbian officials said. The Tisa is one of the country's major rivers. Witnesses said parts of the Danube River were "all white with the bellies of dead fish," the Beta news agency reported. The Tisa River "has been killed. Not even bacteria have survived," Serbian Environment Minister Bratislav Blazic told The Associated Press as he toured the affected area. Local volunteers were collecting dead fish for burial in efforts to isolate some of the lethal substance. Reports added that toxic heavy metals including lead and cadmium were also discharged. The leaching of these elements often accompany the cyanide extraction of gold from ores that contain these heavy metals. Predrag Prolic, head of the Chemistry and Toxicology faculty at Belgrade University, said it had "destroyed life in the Tisa for years to come." Prolic added that beside aquatic life, birds feeding off fish and wildlife are also at risk and the poisoned water can filter into the soil, grass, grain and livestock. The Haber Gold Process HGP could prevent catastrophes like this from happening. Disasters like these are regrettable, but they do cause the public to increase concerned about the dangers of cyanide. This can build interest in our non-toxic alternative, the HGP. And that is good. However, most of the attention has been merely reactive. Therefore, the Company is not overly concerned with riding on the coattails of the publicity surrounding unfortunate incidents like this for purposes of self promotion. However, Haber has received some inquiries from the media and mining companies because of the spill. Whether or not these inquiries result in new business opportunities or media coverage, we can not say. Our focus is on commercializing the HGP and letting the benefits of the technology speak for itself. EMP PATENT PROTECTION The original patent protection for Electromolecular Propulsion (EMP) has run out. Some shareholders have inquired whether further patent protection is possible. Haber, Inc. had planned for this eventuality from the time of the first patent filing. The original patents were "process" patents. This means they were filed to protect the fundamental technology by listing hundreds of different chemicals that can be used in different combinations for EMP use. The number of possibilities for combining these listed materials are for practical purposes almost without a limit. This results in only a trial and error empirical approach to creating an EMP "protocol", which is comparable to a computer user's "software". Haber's patent language did not explain any technical theory that explains the fundamental principles which need to be used as a guide to formulate reliable EMP protocols. The patent language listed a few reproducible protocols of little commercial value to demonstrate that the technology works. Since EMP remains a completely proprietary technology to date, our overall position at this stage is not to apply for more patents prior to the commercial need to do so. A manual was produced over the years that details how to develop protocols. It is called the EMP Protocol Development Manual. This proprietary document can be copyrighted as well. Additionally, each application protocol can be patent protected. Haber, Inc. intends to apply for patents for every protocol developed to date and henceforth. Key to each application of EMP are the individual protocols. The proprietary knowledge for facilitating EMP protocol development essentially remains with the company. Haber, Inc. intends to "own" the methodology for designing protocols (again, like software for a computer) for a long time to come so it will be established well ahead of the companies that will surely follow after the EMP Protocol Development Manual patent expires (sometime after the year 2020). This means protocols that are claimed to have been developed without this manual will require evidence of the empirical research done to do this for the patent application to be valid. It is unlikely that another scientist will recreate what Norman Haber developed over twenty years any time soon. Additionally, patents can be filed for the EMP instrumentation. Each instrument, like the new EMP 2000 mentioned in the last update, and the various cells that have been designed for EMP, can be patented. Some of these cells are newly developed and have not been shown to the public. Two EMP cells perform in a unique way and at very high speeds. There are also micro preparatory and concentration devices (small-scale purification) that perform unlike anything available today. This Company Update contains forward-looking statements as defined by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include statements concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events or performance and underlying assumptions, and all statements that are other than statements of historical facts. These statements are subject to uncertainties and risks including, but not limited to, economic conditions, the impact of competition and pricing, government regulation, and other risks. All such forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of the Company are qualified. The Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof.