House prices expected to fall - Official

System

Llubrevlis, you're being made to look a bit of a tool. Try an actual counter argument on your next post.

Edit: Arf, I just clicked that link, that's one of the most obvious looking scam sites I ever saw.

ess0two

Who gives a f++k about silver anyway?

Really2

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Get real, it is not the responsibility of someone to prove a negative. Your website asserts the deposit levels in 1900 were 12bn. Prove it.

It is like me saying actually, I'm David Beckham, I post on here for fun in my spare time. I don't need to prove this, it is up to you to prove I'm talking tripe. No.

Does the concept not even strike you as a little silly? Just how could they possibly have known what was even 10 metres below the earths surface, let alone any significant depth. How could they have covered the globe?

Today it may be possible with some ground penetrating radar or perhaps tests via seismic measurements and material density, but that would not be easy. I'm sorry, but it is gibberish.

I agree, ad to that the fact we are digging more an more silver out of the ground I don't get the silver bull argument TBH.

It seems to be based on a few miss informing the gullible

Exocet

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

Just how could they possibly have known what was even 10 metres below the earths surface, let alone any significant depth.

Er, I am somewhat of an expert in this so I'll explain. It's based on geoestimating, a science that has been around since Gallileo. Ever wonder how Newton could calculate to within 15 kilos how much the earth weighed? Same principles. Quite simply, based on the exploration they had done at the time it was possible to estimate very accurately the likely reserves across the planet. Same thing was done with oil in 1875 and has so far proven to be within 99.3% accuracy.

Want to know when the lithium will run out? See Archimedes First Table of Stuff - 52 bc. Trouble is, we think we know it all these days, because we don't have books - we have the internet.

Really2

Exocet wrote: »

Ever wonder how Newton could calculate to within 15 kilos how much the earth weighed? Same principles.

No, newton used his own law of gravity to estimate the weight of the earth.
He did not speculate what the elemental break down was when estimating the weight of the earth AFAIK.

Procrastinator333

Exocet wrote: »

Er, I am somewhat of an expert in this so I'll explain. It's based on geoestimating, a science that has been around since Gallileo. Ever wonder how Newton could calculate to within 15 kilos how much the earth weighed? Same principles. Quite simply, based on the exploration they had done at the time it was possible to estimate very accurately the likely reserves across the planet. Same thing was done with oil in 1875 and has so far proven to be within 99.3% accuracy.

Want to know when the lithium will run out? See Archimedes First Table of Stuff - 52 bc. Trouble is, we think we know it all these days, because we don't have books - we have the internet.

As far as I'm aware Newton didn't calculate the mass of the earth. He generated the formaulas required, F=GM1M2/r^2 and F=mg, but he did not calculate the mass as he didn't know the value of G, that came later.

These formulas also resulted in the total mass of the earth, not any constituent parts.

As you are an expert, please explain how this or "geoestimating" can be used to calculate the amount of oil/silver?

I tried to google geoestimating, but nothing came up.

The crap I end up arguing about on this site!:eek:

Exocet

Really2 wrote: »

No, newton used his own law of gravity to estimate the weight of the earth.
He did not speculate what the elemental break down was when estimating the weight of the earth AFAIK.

Well no, and I expect he didn't use kilos either. I was using him as an example of deep thought, where by using ideas and intelligence it is possible to draw inferences for the entire geo molecular system. This is similar in many ways to what Hamish does, but it will be many many years before he gets the recognition he deserves.

Really2

Exocet wrote: »

Well no, and I expect he didn't use kilos either. I was using him as an example of deep thought, where by using ideas and intelligence it is possible to draw inferences for the entire geo molecular system. This is similar in many ways to what Hamish does, but it will be many many years before he gets the recognition he deserves.

It was a good bluff , I give you that. But mass gives no indication of chemical property 1KG of helium is the same weight as 1KG of lead.

Exocet

Procrastinator333 wrote: »

I tried to google geoestimating, but nothing came up.

I suggest you visit the British Library, Geological section, 1802-1885. The author J. Peewit catalogued a lot of this stuff in his much loved reference - GeoEstimating for Dummies.

Really2

Exocet wrote: »

I suggest you visit the British Library, Geological section, 1802-1885. The author J. Peewit catalogued a lot of this stuff in his much loved reference - GeoEstimating for Dummies.

Next to Walter low-d'bolex's guide to blagging.