And your supposed answers are very generic especially with words like == could, plausible, no lie, ~not suspicious, etc - these are not facts / evidence to prove any of these claims. I could bang on about conditional probability and explain the likelihood of all of this (combined) being extremely improbable but you seem to know about Google.
If one actually reads how many times "career" is mentioned to a specific claim which was said in isolation - this person must have 5 or 6 careers
Also, the long fairy tale didn't happen until all this was put in a single post - go figure ..........
"
9. An engineer but doesn't believe in doing a "fancy DFS", build it and it will produce, evidence ==post_id=73194935 Any sell side infomemo IS NOT evidence. Ask any investment banker what this statement means"
Not sure what you are jabbering on about here - but DFS are usually done by independent 3rd parties (such as Ausenco, GR Eng, etc) and they cover a range of details (technical, flowsheet validation, optimisation parameters, economic metrics, financial scenarios, etc). They are the document that most lenders require when they make their ultimate decision to finance a project ..........
The saga continues ..........
https://asic.gov.au/regulatory-resources/markets/market-supervision/gatekeeper-expectations-and-pump-and-dump-activity/"Possible misinformation orexcessive social mediacommentary about a listed entity or security."
