Member Info for Madpunter

If Carlsburg did share tranfers, TXN will have our shares, but none of MZ or SH/O.

Looed - If TXN is a stand-alone structure, not related to FRC, and only related in image and not legal sense. Then, why would Deloitte have control? Also, how do we know that our shares are in TXN?

Needalife - I think you are taking my Mark Twain post out of context. You need to scroll back to the start of the thread.

As Mark Twain said, "It's easier to fool someone, than to convince them that they've been fooled."

Quady - 160+ leaders no longer think COP30 is important.

The game's up. COP30 is no longer relevant with so many leaders absent.

'Xi and Modi were no-shows, along with the leaders of around 160 other countries. And notably absent was the US President Donald Trump'

The figure of 160 + may be wrong though, as it's from an article on the BBC!

Mathersfinger - I think the $1400/oz figure refers to the breakeven cost, as the median costs for large producers was $1328/oz. The latter figure applied when Gold was $1750/oz in the PFS, giving $422/oz profit. The price of Gold has since shot up, but costs haven't risen as quickly. Also, Barrick might have had a figure below the Median cost previously.

..lost money...

..supply chain the opportunity....

Addicknt - If Actusray wasn't a Chinese company I would agree with your figures. However, as the Chinese government is partially or wholly involved in many companies, especially strategic companies, I doubt they've list money. We know the Chinese are trying to control the whole supply chain of REM's and Copper. Therefore, it's in their interest to secure companies like SOLG. Then by shorting SOLG, it allowed other Chinese companies in the supply the opportunity to buy cheap shares in SOLG. If the Chinese eventually end up with SOLG, they may have bought some of the shares at a pittance under the radar. If they don't end up with SOLG and they had accumulated cheap shares through the Actusray short, they will still make a profit.

Eloro - When the poor went to the colonies it was as convicts, indentured slaves or press ganged sailors. Only the rich generally went as fare paying passengers. My mother's Uncle worked steerage to Canada and then as a lumberjack to pay off the cost of fare. Wage slaves were worthless and easily replaced. Only the rich landed gentry, who were also the politicians had any freedoms. That's why the WEF are wiping out the middle class and allowing uncontrolled immigration. They want to turn the clock back. The illegals are already being exploited by people with Uber taxis, Uber eats, Deliveroo etc. They use their badges to work illegally, earning a pittance. It's why they wear full face balaclavas etc even in a 30°C heatwave. The same peoplw were exploited in the Gulf through the Kafala System. It's why I never have food delivered and didn't watch any games in the Qatar World Cup live (15k+ died in under 10 years building the stadiums and infrastructure).

Eloro - Anyone reading your post would think that only people living in the former colonies, suffered through slavery. In the UK people were serfs. peasants, and wage slaves, the latter right up until WWII. My Nan left home at 14 to work in service in London for 3 years. When she signed up for the training, those on the course were promised jobs in S. Wales, but the majority ended up in London. They worked from 05:30 to 23:30 for 6 days, with half day on Sunday. However, they had to go to church with the family, then bath and wash their clothes, so no rest on the half day. After 18 months of no pay, the rail fare to London was paid and after 3 years the return journey was also paid. In other words, no pay for the first 3 years and if they wanted to visit home afterwards, it would be another 18 months without pay. Any breakages had to be paid for and would extend this timescale. Some suffered physical violence and even rape by their employers. They were easily replaced and didn't have to be bought like slaves, so were often treated appallingly.

Watch the TV series Land of My Mother's and read the book, Not aJob for a Little Girl by R. Scadden.

The industrial revolution resulted in the loss of work on the land and people moving to cities to work in factories in vile conditions. Other's moved to new towns and villages, which sprung up through coal mining, working in even harsher conditions. Injury and death could result in the women and children having to move to work houses. Doesn't sound like a bed of roses for the majority of the people living in the UK.

Quady - Changing the argument again. See my post at 1215. Antarctica not Artic. Hence, the scientist sacked who worked on the Great Barrier Reef.

As for links. You've been given them before and your only argument will be peer review. See explanation previously highlighting smoking and lung cancer.

Stack - The IPCC keep changing the argument. Initially they denied record sea ice for years, until they could no longer argue with the satellite images. Next they blamed the record sea ice on glacial meltwater, as fresh water freezes easier than sea water. When it was pointed out that the region is a desert with little precipitation and vast expanses of shoreline with no rivers, but increased sea ice, they went vack to disputing the record Winter sea ice, as the amount varies, and not every year will be a record. They sacked the top Australian scientist for the Great Barrier Reef and put a gagging order on him. I've debated with many scientists who have asked me to turn off my phone before agreeing that MMGW is a scam, but they have to toe the line or lose their jobs. Even a weather reader and a wildlife TV personality asked me to turn off my phone before agreeing with my scepticism.

Quady - Jetstream not Gulfstream.

Peer review means nothing. The money for research comes from research councils, governed by industrialists with vested interests. Hence, the Tobacco industry was able to prove for decades with peer reviewed research, that smoking didn't cause lung cancer. When the tide turned and the money flowed into research looking into the harmfull effects of smoking, ASH funded a 30 year research programme into passive smoking. However, with 18 months left it was going to prove that it wasn't harmful, so the funding was pulled. Therefore, it's extremely difficult to get funding and peer reviews for research that isn't wanted by the WEF Industrialists.

Quady - What's your thoughts on the $100bn fund that was in the Wikileaks to pay influencers to promote MMGW. The estimate is that the backers get back $125tn through Carbon Trading!

Carbonic Acid

Stack - No the temperature hasn't risen. It's why there's been record sea ice in Winter in Antarctica. It's also why the coral reefs are dying, as lower temperatures result in more Carbon Acid, as more Carbon Dioxide disolves in water.

The increased severity of the weather is due to the Jet Streams moving from desert Polar regions, to Temperate regions, where they block the weather systems. Hence in recent years as well as heat waves, there's been record snow in the Sahara, Texas, Arizona, Menorca and the canals in Amsterdam froze, allowing skating.

I studied in the early 90's for a degree and 2 post grads in Environmental Systems and specialized in Energy and Environmental Management. I wanted to save the planet from MMGW and used the figures from the IPCC of 15°C for years. I started to become sceptical with the data. The turning point was when the IPCC started using 14°C in 1997. These are indisputable facts, not rubbish! The figures didn't give the result wanted, so the data was changed. It's why a man who's risked his life for the environment and was the cofounder of Greenpeace, left Greenpeace!

Your previous arguments against this change of data, was that it was 'estimates.' Obviously, you now realise that using estimates is not real science, hence your accusations of 'climate denial' and labelling of facts as 'rubbish.'

Delve deeper and find that they use data from weather stations that don't exist anymore and from other's with a margin of error of 2-5°C.

Anyone who doesn't toe the line is cancelled and even given a gagging order through the courts. Science has always encouraged free debate, but not this science.

Quady - Science went out of the window, when the IPCC started using 14°C instead of 15°C in 1997, to enable the 'science' to show an increase of a least half a degree by the Millennium.