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: Jon Matz who wrote (9851)	7/14/1998 9:29:00 PM
From: the Chief	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34075

Hi Jon. 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. I have no problem with the "proven" if in fact the proven is alluvial and based on the geological formations is 2 dimentionalized with trenching and sampling in the alluvial basin. My problem is still the third dimension, depth. His pronouncement of the proven in itself is not questionable and under normal circumstances would probably have gone unchallenged. It was the "National Enquirer" like announcement of the indicated and inferred, it literally invalidated all of his previous work and raised the "credibility spectre". This is what I find irresponsible (MOO) It appears to me that you have offered enough criticism of Guido's conclusions to indicate that it is almost certainly fraudulent. I offered enough criticism of Guido's conclusions to indicate "geological suicide or geological irresponsibility in the least". I have never raised the spectre of "fraud" "scam" "pump" or any other word to indicate a dishonourable or illegal act, nor do I intend too. I believe, until otherwise shown, that all members of GE including Guido are honourable people. That also allows me however, to question "process and method" at will. All in the pursuit of protecting my bank account balance and ensure my continued retirement! The obvious conclusions are that his method is; correct and all the gold is there proven, indicated and inferred.....or it is not. The reason I say that is because the "method" to produce the proven is applied to a "model of preassumed data" to come up with inferred and indicated. Therefore if the method fails scrutiny in the proven category, the rest falls like a house of cards. Perhaps if the "Proven" proves true you will consider it dumb luck on Guido's part. I just don't know. I do not question the 6 million ounces, I just question the third dimension, depth. If the Cangalli has alluvial gold over 25 miles of river bed, I would bet you there is 6 million ounces of gold. however, it would not be UNeconomical (IMHO) to recover it. If you try to convince me there is alluvial gold and flakes to depths of 2500 feet, then show me drill holes in a grid accepted by the International mining standard and I will mortgage my home and borrow money to ensure I get a piece of this pie!! Definitions follow as requested; RESERVES - The term given to a defined grade and size of an ore body. A reserve cannot be determined until a predetermined number of drill holes are taken in a sufficiently close grid and assayed completely to give an accurate and complete estimate of an average grade of an economic mineral which can be quantified over an definite three-dimensional area. There are three categories of reserves Proven reserves - material for which tonnage and grade are computed from dimensions revealing in outcrops, trenches, underground workings or drill holes; grade is computed form the results of adequate sampling; and the sites for inspection, sampling and measurement are so spaced and the geological character so well defined that size, shape and mineral content are established Probable reserves - material for which tonnage and grade are computed partly from specific measurements, samples or production data and partly from projection for a reasonable distance on geological evidence; and for which the sites available for inspection, measurement and sampling are too widely or otherwise inappropriately spaced to outline the material completely or to establish its grade throughout Possible reserves - material for which quantitative estimates are based largely on broad knowledge of the geological characteristics of the deposit and for which there are few samples or measurements Resource - minerilization based on geological evidence and assumed continuity. May or may not be supported by samples but is supported by geological, geochemical, geophysical or other data the Chief