In Geology class 101, here is what the students learn about minerals:

Students in lab will be required to do the following:
1. MINERALS
• Identify common mineral samples based on mineral identification tables and important physical properties.
• Distinguish between rocks and minerals.
• Recognize crystal form.
• Distinguish between cleavage and fracture, and recognize cleavage types.
• Determine the luster, streak, approximate density, diaphaneity, and tenacity of common mineral samples.
• Determine the hardness of common mineral samples using reference minerals (Mohs scale) or relative to a glass plate.
• Recognize other physical properties that are important in the identification of some minerals.
a. Taste
b. Reaction to Hydrochloric Acid
c. Striations 10
d. Magnetism
e. Double refraction
f. Feel
g. Odor
• Know the important uses for common minerals studied in lab.
• Know the compositional groups for common minerals studied in lab.
a. Carbonates
b. Halides
c. Native elements
d. Oxides
e. Silicates (Ferromagnesian and Non-ferromagnesian)
f. Sulfates
g. Sulfides

Also these mandatory classes:

Required General Education (13 credits)
Chem 201 General Chemistry I (5)
Phys 211 General Physics I (4)
Math 121 Calculus I (4)
Core Courses (22 credits)
Geol 121 Physical Geology (4)
Geol 122 Earth History (4)
Geol 201 Mineralogy (4)
Geol 202 Lithology (3)
Geol 320 Sedimentology and Stratigraphy (3)
Geol 330 Structural Geology (4)

Now guess what they teach in Physical Geology and Mineralogy? It is not until the Junior year do the students start specializing in classes of their particular field of study of geology they wish to pursue.

"As I've indicated all along you're both the same in claim and behaviour".

The syntax is crazy, while the spelling is oddly English/Canadian.

But how about it Jack: why would anyone lend PTV money if PTV could get the money cheaper from the bank?

In regard to these statements of yours: Your geology statements are wrong. Your PTV interpretations are flawed, mostly just plain wrong.
Your legal postion is wrong. You twist people's words, say they said things that they never did. You mislead. You corrupt basic statements.

Prove it, just don't say it. You do have the facts to prove it, right? So bring it on. PROVE IT. Wait, you just did what you are accusing me of making claims without any proof. Too funny.

PTVPartner is a Ponzi. Garrett is a liar. PTVPartner is not authorized to sell securities in the US, and Garrett is not a licensed broker. It makes no difference where PTVPartner is located. Being offshore is a MYTH and a LIE as long as you are selling investments to US CItizens.

I think the people listening to Garrett, in his own words, can decide for themselves if I have misrepresented or misinterpreted his comments. It is why I posted the link for all of them to hear him for themselves.

Still trying to defend this Ponzi, while trying to claim you're not. But keep posting because you are doing far more damage to PTVPartner than I am doing.

What you seem to want to overlook, but you really do know it, is that I am being sarcastic with you, and exposing all your double-speak and psycho-babble. See you keep saying I have to prove everything, while at the same time not demanding the same things from Garrett. Your weak attempt is to say since I am the one saying it is a Ponzi, I have to prove it. Well, I have proven it, you just don't accept the proof. None of you shills ever accept the proof. To do so shows you have been lying from the beginning. I have yet to have one shill ever admit to the proof, and you are no exception.

Garrett really did say that the Chinese wanted to buy the whole operation, but he refused, He did say that the Chinese then offered to pay all the costs for the development of the mine and infrastucutre, but he refused because he wanted to offer this to the HYIP people, and pay up to 190% return on their investment. So are you saying this is a lie? Sure sounds like it to me.

You really are a one-trick pony. Did I mention that PTVPartner is a PONZI and Garrett is a liar? If not, it is a PONZI and Garrett is a liar. Glad I could clear that up for you.

I never said you did. Why do you obfuscate (look it up Michael)? I said you claim that PTV is a scam yet you continually fail to provide proof. If it's that obvious prove it. That's all. Where's your proof?

Your geology statements are wrong.

Your PTV interpretations are flawed, mostly just plain wrong.

Your legal postion is wrong.

You twist people's words, say they said things that they never did. You mislead. You corrupt basic statements.

Why? We have a stick-on classic ponzi scam staring us all right in the face.

We should be knee deep in proof from you.

And how much proof have you given us?

None.

How about some proof? Simple proof. If you provide proof I really won't be upset or offended, I welcome it. Your next post? Go for it, it could be the one. Heck, you need it.

In the meantime stop telling people you know things that you clearly don't.

OK, I'll retract that PTVPartner is a scam. Actually it is a classic Ponzi, as it requires new money to pay for the early ones in and so on and so on. Scam or Ponzi, PTVPartner is still illegal, Garrett is a liar, and it won't be long until PTVPartner joins GNI and Genius Funds in the toilet. I know that I have retracted that PTVPartner is a scam will make Jack really happy. Not sure about me calling it what it is a classic Ponzi. Somehow I don't think Jack will be too pleased with me calling it a classic Ponzi. Oh well, the truth hurts.

Speaking of GNI and Genius Funds. I think Garrett just might be the admin of both of these programs as well. Each Admin claims they wanted to provide a real HYIP Program, and all claimed they were the most honest, the most real of all the HYIP programs, and will be around for a long time. So much for Garrett's original program BS.

One of the reason why I posted the link to the audio was for everyone to hear Garrett tell about how China would have funded the entire project, but he chose instead to pay everyone up to 190% return for their investment into the silica mine project. As Michael has so eloquently pointed out, Garrett could have gotten the money from a bank much cheaper than from the investors, let alone cheaper from China. So much for his astute business knowledge and acumen, as well as the people behind PTV. What a tool.

Guess you were able to find the name of the mine in Ohio. I knew you could do it if you just tried. I am fully aware of all the various types of Quartz, Quartzite, silica, and their derivative products. I also know the purity grade of each type. Obviously Garrett has no clue, which makes his claims their silica mine is the only one with purity of 97-99% more ridiculous. Just so you know, when you take geology classes in coillege, they teach you that gold and platinum cannot be found in the same location. Now whether or not they remember it is another story.

Garrett is the one who is asking for people to give him hundreds and thousands of dollars without disclosing what he is doing with the money. But if there are any of you who wish to give hundreds and thousands of dollars to Eagle, we will be honored to accept the donations. Just think, instead of losing your money to a Ponzi, you can donate to Eagle, get a tax deduction, and help put an end to Internet investment fraud like PTVPartner; as well as putting people like Garrett in prison where they belong. Plus knowing you helped clean up the Internet from Internet investment fraud. And you will receive full disclosure about your donation. Just pointing out the differences between Eagle and PTVPartner.

What ever happened to MrMegaWealth? Seems he has disappeared all of a sudden. Wonder if exposing his lies (must be related to Garrett) about his Lambo being fake had anything to do with it? LOL!

Since Jack has loved all my other posts up till now, I am sure he will really love this next one. That is if I can find the time to do so. It will just expose more of Garrett's lies about this magical silica mine, and how PTVPartner is a classic Ponzi.

"Your departure from adherence to standard practice and conventional thinking and process by firstly not citing references and secondly not remedying when you had the chance is questionable if not suspicious. Why now?"

Jack, what is your first language?

Where did you learn English?

We really do need to shut down that school and get you a rebate if you paid anything.

As I've indicated all along you're both the same in claim and behaviour.

Lynn wrote:
"In the meantime actually do some investigative work on your own so you know the information is real; instead of relying on me, whom you do not trust to provide the information. It is out there and easily found. So get off your assets and actually find out for yourself. Here's a hint….try Google."

What makes you think I haven't? Because I asked? lol, none so blind. What I have found and what I already know renders your geology claims moot at best. Back on familiar territory aren't we?.

Silica is an umbrella term, it has many forms – quartz for example, which itself exists in different forms. Quartzite is not necessarily metamorphic, therefore different types. Not to mention the differing concentrations and purities of each form. How is each mineral represented with respect to deposit and ore? All this and more affects price range and interpretation of statements which must be specific in their claim. EIR's are not global and they're certainly not uniform, either in content or application. And on it goes.

Not only are you not specific in your claims but you won't even say where the info comes from ("I found it on Google!" I hear you say).

Too basic, open to interpretation, and selective info presentation. Geology is a science that has no room for your vague and unsubstantiated claims on the specific geology and associated economy of a supposed mine.

"Search Google" is not an answer let alone getting anywhere near any semblance of proof.

Your departure from adherence to standard practice and conventional thinking and process by firstly not citing references and secondly not remedying when you had the chance is questionable if not suspicious. Why now?

So your information as provided is spurious. Questions remain over the existence of a PTV mine just as they do over the information you provide and more importantly your motive.

Lynn wrote:
"PTVPPartner is a scam. No need to temper anything. The magical mine does not exist."

Prove it. I've just wiped the floor with what you've brought to the table and you're not even taking the opportunity to cite references. Lazy, or hidden agenda?

PTV could be a scam but you're a long way from proving it on this form. No mine equals scam? We haven't even got to that yet. You're not even trying, are you?

https://www.ptvpartner.com/flash/mp3/mp3_xml_multi.swf.

Two things you need to know. To the right of the picture you will see the 3 arrows. You need to click on the second arrow, and then look to the top of the link and make sure it says silica mine. It is about 27 minutes long. Then click play. There is also a second recording that is 57 minutes long. Again click on the arrow until you see silica 2 at the top of the link, then hit play. If you hear the ocean or birds, you have to click on the arrow to get to the audio tracks of his recording.

I will warn you that the first 12-13 minutes is a lot of nonsense about PTVPartner, why he formed it, etc., before he begins telling about the mine. You can also hear how he is going to have a section on how to do due diligence on the blog. Wait, the blog has disappeared, so I guess since it is coming back soon, you will have to wait to see what he says is due diligence.