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: Zeev Hed who wrote (8000)	10/20/1998 4:37:00 PM
From: Ptaskmaster	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 14226

Although following this thread I certainly do not necessarily understand all the details of extraction and processing technology discussed here. A quick reading of the October 20th letter from Jensen does however leave me with some questions. High values in shipments 1 and 2 versus negligible recoveries in 3-6 -- -might not be just in processing procedures, but could be mixing of samples and/or sampling or mixture problems in ore pile? A series of two smaller 60 pound tests --- two is not a very long series. Or it it meant a series of 2 x 60 lb (surface and deep?) samples from multiple sites on the ore pile? I've probably missed something here, but it seems that there is an underlying assumption of homogeneity of precious metals in the ore pile. I understand that mixing of gases and liquids, much less a solid ore pile, is actually quite complicated, so why should not one assume that there is a "nugget [-like] effect" and test with sufficient samples to resolve this possibility?