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 : Winspear Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mineman who wrote (14151)	2/10/1999 11:21:00 AM
From: ddl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26850

So mineman, what if they got another independent to analyze the 3 stones and he said they appear to have the same signatures? What would that tell you? And, have you called the company and asked if the 3 gemologists who did appraise the diamonds, whether or not there were any concerns stated in their report?

To: mineman who wrote (14151)	2/10/1999 12:00:00 PM
From: Digger	Respond to of 26850

Diamond Study: The parcel of diamonds recovered from the two 100 tonne kimberlite samples obtained from the NW dyke comprises 1387 diamonds. A study of 1291 diamonds from this parcel was undertaken by Dr. Malcolm E. McCallum, a recognized international expert with considerable experience in this field. The remaining 96 diamonds that were not studied in detail represent the smallest screen-size of diamonds recovered. Because plant recovery in this small size range is inefficient, these diamonds were considered to be unrepresentative of the size class and were omitted from the study. Although the small size of this diamond parcel precludes rigorous statistical treatment, Dr. McCallum considers that the observed distribution of the physical properties is statistically relevant. The main conclusions of his report are as follows: * The various physical characteristics exhibited by the three large gem diamonds (10.82, 8.42, and 6.04 carats) recovered from the kimberlite are completely consistent with those observed in smaller stones from all size fractions. * There is a very strong correlation of morphological characteristics between diamonds recovered from each of the two sample sites.fractions, as well as evaluation of size-frequency distribution curves, preferential breakage of larger, poorer quality stones appears likely to have occurred either by late magmatic or induced processes. I attemped to copy from the 15th release. If 1200 stones were found to come from the same place would not a reasonable person conclude they ALL came from the same site?

To: mineman who wrote (14151)	2/10/1999 12:08:00 PM
From: gg cox	Respond to of 26850

Food for thought, Fanatics A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965), British statesman, writer

To: mineman who wrote (14151)	2/10/1999 1:15:00 PM
From: Walt	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 26850

If this is your position then you should "DEMAND IT OF ALL COMPANIES". In fact you should lobby the various exchanges so that weither it be WSP, SUF, DMM, MPV, or even DeBeers that all diamond parcels be evaluated by an independent researcher before any results are released. In fact you should go farther, how do we know mines in production arenèt laundering black market or foreign stones. Maybe ever diamond cut and sold should have its point of origin clearly identified. regards Walt