Roundtable Discussion; The Future of Mineral Sands. Watch the video here.
Sorry i had to go out so i couldn't finish my explanation on why Skwizz is named after Dianne Abbott, (seems to have the same memory on financial reporting and accounting skills.......6th dec21, Skwizz declares, still invested in UKOG......next post (same day).
"Querty , still the same 1k bought at 0.18",
Then declares mid January ...sold my last tranche at a loss bought at 0.18 sold at 0.16, when the sp has been nowhere near 0.16 for months, since it dropped from the last placing, as has been mentioned on many occasions......therefore proving to be extremely inaccurate or dishonest, in the style of Dianne Abbott
Swizzy Abbott , who is consistently calling positive posters " rampers " is now complaining that one of the "accused" has made two consecutive posts that are not ramping....you can't make it up....oh sorry the naysayers usually do.
NAYSAYERS ALWAYS ACTIVE
Ibug, thanks for that, took some reading ha ha, as i thought, there was a mention of kl1 stimulation but not allowed under current planning permission (paraphrased because i don't cut and paste).......(for the benefit of pedantic penguin)...i recall they blamed using the wrong mud also...another kock up, unfortunately
Penguin, i am not re -writing anything, but i do apologise for not noting who was claiming the photo, but that still does not prove he took it.
If you would like to look again on the left hand side of the shale section it clearly states "horizontal fracking well for gas" so i was only commenting on what I had read
Penguin, what part of my opening statement "the article is regarding deep water disposal, and not fracking" didn't you understand. And my post finishes with "and is about the consequences of" deep water disposal "not fracking.
therefore your patronising following conversation was not necessary as I fully understood the article, as i had already said at the beginning that i had scrutinised it, i assume you understand my meaning of that.
With regards to the comment on the building, I did not suggest the photo was rigged from someone from the USGS, show me where if so, I was alluding to someone who presented that photo to the writer of the article. (We all know how reporters can exaggerate and fake things don't we)......please don't add things that aren't there.
" It could mean there was already a problem with the chimney triggered with the earthquake " and it could also mean it was nothing to do with an earthquake at all.
To conclude, I fully understood the article and the cut off diagram of the various concepts of water disposal and injection, very interesting to someone who has a good understanding of geography.