Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Birch Mountain Resources BMD-ASE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russet who wrote (326)	6/30/2000 7:35:46 AM
From: Chuca Marsh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 402

Thanks Russett, I went to read 30 IWA posts and saw no mention of the 20% resource estimate deviation that I had read about 3 weeks ago, no referance to the fact that they can't locate the drill holes of prior because the management didn't take GPS readings and Trenched/Bulldozed over the old Drill Holes as I recall reading. There has never been such talk about those two facts at BMD and their 600 logs from drill cores to electric logs mainly from takings by the co-development partners in the oil sands industries. You ssaid one thing that sticks out and must be corrected first: "..I would think that if BMD really knew what they had at present, they would have applied for the patents already. My guess is they still haven't figured it out, and thus cannot prove that the Alberta limestone under the Tar sands have concentrated gold, and possibly PGM's, that can be mined economically. The cores are waiting,... .."" You see, THEY have last montth applied for and submitted info for a PATENT to the US Patent Office for a North American Patent. They are in fact in PATENT PENDING STATUS. It takes a year to 18 mos to receive a formal patent issuance, but we are hense in that veil of secracy period, as a fact. I agree, "..If they have a process, that extracts this "new gold" from the masking agents or molecular complex that prevents it's detection, then they better get out the core and start using that process to prove they have a resource..." I would want to see the BEADS of metal and a detail of the exact repeatability. I say 100% repeats is not warranted as to being needed, partial is a verrification that the METAL IS THERE, a legitizatmatation ( sorry ). A Bench Test Route should be done. Doing. Not with ASSAY ways but with the secret sause and the juice to make PROCESS METALS. But once the metal is on the table will the governing bodies have the right to the FORMULAE? I hope not, in order to COC the results. CANMET has acted as 3rd Party with a ring of endorsement, I want more facts there, it was first declarred and disclosed that NR 2 weeks ago. Sash Reseach Institute and U of Calgary had results 3rd Party last year, we need more details there and exact repeatibilities now declarred so that partial is better than none so the world can judge. Partial Repeats mean to me that 4 tries of the same core is 2 similar results and 2 non results or 1 non and 3 similar or some other ratios. I want those data facts rather than the fact that THEY DID NOT REPRODUCE for 100% or in this case of a pulled out of the air example, all 4 times. We need some more info. They have it with all the pent up testings, so we await it. The facts are that there are 2 sides here. ASSAY STUDY and PROCESS TECHNOLOGY or as I like tocall it - Parocess Nanotechnology. I suggest that noty onlt to get that TIME but get next weeks US NEWS & World REPORT that again is focussed on NANOTECHNOLOGY. Thanks for the thought, I will re read when awake and think more, will visite the news sites. Chucka PS- "...disclosure and investor relations and promotional policies including the dissemination of misleading and overly promotional information .." BMD is not this way and EVERYBOIDY KNOWS that they don't hype it up, maybe that is why I am so strongly so proactive and research fairly dessiminated hopefull here on the net, someone HAS TO DO IT FOR SH benifits.