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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Richard Mazzarella who wrote (6275)	6/20/1998 11:22:00 AM
From: Tim Hall	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 14226

Richard, I look for information. I contact old friends, classmates, government agencies and even named consultants. I post the good, the bad and the ugly. Unfortunately, not too much good to be found lately. Remember, I posted that I spoke with equipment vendor who saw free gold from Maxam under a microscope. Next week I hope to learn from Pima Air Quality about Maxam's permits. The county is required to publish the permit application 30 days prior to issuance. This is to allow time for public input. Nothing posted yet. I don't know Twiford. He might very well be a competent assayer, research chemist or whatever. He is probably also a very nice and sincere individual. He does however, have a little history with the SEC which is related to mining. Since this is public record, I think investors have the right to know. In my opinion, all of these DD's still leave out one crucial step. None can explain the mineralogy. Until they do, they will never understand extraction. Which theory do you want? A: The gold is in tiny chunks in quartz. It never had a chance to finish forming when it was deposited, that it can't form a gold bead when assayed. B: The gold is in a newly discovered form like a bucky ball. C: There really isn't any gold, it gets transmuted when it is assayed. D: There is so many other valuable elements present, they all interfere with each other. E: There is too much petzite present to do good assays. etc. I still believe that defining this mineralogy should not be too difficult for a good research team of geologists and metallurgists. These two elements seem to be lacking from all of the big name consultants. One of the best consultants, in my opinion is right in AZ. They are Mountain States. Why don't any of these companies use them? Cimmeta are good engineers but their specialty is construction, not process. They quoted construction work at my plant two years ago. Good quote too, but too expensive for kitty litter construction. I have rambled enough, the bottom line is that I am still trying to prove to CL that I am not an idiot. I sure miss that guy. VBG Tim Hall