Replies to post #35912 on Liberty Star Uranium and Metals Corp (LBSR)

[benny7439]

"Baseless claims do nothing, but promote a theatrical atmosphere, of fantastical porportions. "

Ya like the statement that this will be 002 in december and that u will buy back at .00001

[dragonball]

<It is my great hope,that both sides of the opportunity can be discussed,without fear of truth. >

this is correct. all sides can be discussed in a constructive manner.

there is nothing to hide from LBSR

:o)

[bluebird50]

lilpup how are those warrant shares coming along? been gone a while.... seems this has a hard time even holding a nickel...

bb50

[bylosellhy]

lil puppy. You present a very rational argument. Any investment here is based on educated speculation (ZTEM findings, and other DD), the logical conclusions about the JV and belief that Briscoe and Geologists know what they are talking about in regards to the potential of the Uranium and Pebble claims. I have shares too, but I realize that its speculation (cautious) at this point, although not blind speculation.

[Hungry]

"IF ztem RESULTS "PROVE" what is "suspected",then by all means we can logically begin to deduce,using real numeric values, as to entertain proponderances of possible future PPS prognostications"

Actually...there are ZTEM baseline reports, that were backed up by drill results, for the Pebble Partnership property.

That's all the "proof" I need to deduce that the ZTEM reports for the Big Chunk are valid and that they will also be proven by drilling...

Using "real numerical values", I can deduce that LBSR should have a market cap well north of $1.5B.
This deduction is based on the fact that Anglo is spending that much to obtain 50% of NAK's claims.

My "well north" statement is based on the fact that the LBSR ZTEM reports indicate that we have multiple signatures of the type shown in the PP property in addition to the uranium properties in AZ.

[ValuePro]

"IF ztem RESULTS "PROVE" what is "suspected",then by all means we can logically begin to deduce,using real numeric values, as to entertain proponderances of possible future PPS prognostications. As of yet,we have no such FACTUAL data,any newcomer to the board will be unfortunately "dazzled" and "moonblinked" by baseless claims,and quickly become disillusioned when facts do not AS OF YET support the blatant fanatasicm."

You fail to appreciate that ZTEM merely backs up geological modeling which tells us that mineral deposits in caldera formations tend occur in clusters, and that such deposits tend to be of uniform size and composition. Therefore, we go back to the time Briscoe was able to show that the Pebble Deposit is part of a weathered caldera formation, justifying LBSRs staking rush - the largest in Alaska state history -, which became the Big Chuck project.

ZTEM doesn't so much prove the model as is does count the targets. Moreover, the model is so reliable that drilling becomes more a procedural matter, especially for public companies, than it does one of "proving" what is there. Drilling, however, is required for understanding where the "sweet spots" are and for mapping out development plans.

The goods are there, ZTEM or no, Lilliput or no.

VP in AZ