InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
AI Subscribe Login/Register account icon
S&P 500
5,985.38
(
0.02%
)
US TECH 100
20,486.80
(
-0.14%
)
Dow Jones
43,958.19
(
0.11%
)
Brent Oil
71.70
(
-0.24%
)
Bitcoin
90,035.93
(
-0.58%
)
Post# of 179954
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (2) Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (2) Next 10 Prev Next

Drannac

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 7
Posts 1957
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 05/19/2015

Drannac

Re: Raingawd post# 162014

Wednesday, 03/27/2019 10:55:31 AM

Wednesday, March 27, 2019 10:55:31 AM

Post# of 179954
It is not worth the cost of a law suit. There is no data in this write up either about the amount of the contaminant- one molecule from the air or someone's hand?- or about the sample tested. For some reason they think it came from Diamond even though some person handed it to the people who tested it. Peer-reviewed journals require details about catalog numbers and lot numbers of materials tested and those used for assays. The source person may have had a cough. It is so shoddy that it discredits the authors.
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Replies (2) Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Replies (2) Next 10 Prev Next
Join InvestorsHub

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