InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,460.48
(
-0.41%
)
US TECH 100
19,181.20
(
-0.43%
)
Dow Jones
39,118.86
(
-0.12%
)
Brent Oil
84.85
(
0.00%
)
Bitcoin
60,776.77
(
0.77%
)
Post# of 18904
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

gnolfinvestor

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 25
Posts 2863
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 09/03/2009

gnolfinvestor

Re: None

Wednesday, 09/02/2015 8:21:48 PM

Wednesday, September 02, 2015 8:21:48 PM

Post# of 18904
i challenge anyone to show one post where i defended the g/m number ...

i clearly stated that the g/ton number is consistent thruout all the assay readings and is the important number ... and if you don't like the new measurement, ignore it ....

why would i defend or even care about a posted number that anyone with a calculator can come up with...

g/ton (gold) X width (in meters) = g/m {TYPO} - should read g X m
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up