say what?, page-7

Why are you misrepresenting DOG's position?

Post #.6359103: "they do have shale gas"- where
s the evidence? Where are the reserves statements? Where are the well records on a DOG permit?

You then provide a link to a document which relates to a native title agreement which originates with DOG management NOT the asx. Pholk can determine that FACT by cutting and pasting the link you provided.

Post #: 6360540: You begin with a personal attack, merely because I asked you to substantiate your previous assertion. OBVIOUSLY I had read the document you cited and OBVIOUSLY it was irrelevant to your assertion. When I asked that you substantiate your statement in Post #.6359103: "they do have shale gas", the best you can do is say "I certainly don't obey your orders". Guess what else you don't do sport? You don't validate your original point. Why? Because your original point is not valid.

You then say "All I have posted came with genuine ASX links". No, what you posted was a link to a DOG press release which DOESN'T concern shale gas. Not in any way an ASX document. DOG send it to them and they release it, no questions asked. It is NOT an ASX document.

Post #: 6361607: Another personal attack, but at least the admission that "it mentions shale gas". Trouble is that's all it does- it DOESN'T validate your original assertion in Post #.6359103: "they do have shale gas".

So, sport, how about laying off the personal attacks and substantiating YOUR statements if you can. If not, how about admitting you're wrong?

TR