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 : Golden Eagle Int. (MYNG) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (9021)	7/9/1998 10:24:00 AM
From: Tim Davies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

claude .. you still talking validity .. after what has happened.. come on now. credibility went out the window with this fiasco

To: Claude Cormier who wrote (9021)	7/9/1998 11:49:00 AM
From: toma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34075

claude - in a sence it's true that the validity is reliant upon the quantity and accuracy of the samples...quantity is more likely the driver, because analytical methods are become very reliable. for Guido to have collected a sufficient number of samples he needed to estimate the natural variability in the geologic system...that is, what is the range of possible results given the randon selection of a sampling location. if he knows what he is doing he defined this prior to embarking on his investigation...or, took a very conservative variability based on a number of previous studies. intuitively, the higher the variability the more samples required to be accurate. if this system is not so variable, he didn't need a large number of samples, only well dispersed samples to cover the entire area... anyway, i'm sure you get the picture. i am looking forward to the "independent" audit of his findings...naturally, hoping they confirm. thanks for responding! mac