I have seen a bilingual web page - Spanish - English - where they appear a
series of pictures of supposed rough Diamonds of giant sizes, the biggest
acquaintance and accepted - the Cullinam - it weighed in rough something
more than 600 grams and those that are shown in that Web site apparently
weight more than a kilogram.
I believe that it is a joke or a fraud; would you be able to investigate?
Any site that starts off with a Nostradamus quartet (and one so eloquently translated) can contain nothing but the truth:
Under chain "guien" by sky beaten (or frozen), åÊno far,
Will be foundåÊ the treasure, åÊ
that for long centuries has been hidden, åÊ
Will åÊcarry death, the carved åÊ(or jumped) eye will rest.
Paul
in Sn Jose (Pto Rico)
Posted: Sun Jan 09, 2005 | 11:22 AM
As proving that those pictures are tricks or that the stones are another thing different from diamonds?
Paul
padego Member
Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2005 | 11:40 AM
The material shown appears to be industrial grade, which is the most common form of diamond. It's used for drills, saws,grinders etc. especially in cutting stone such as granite countertops.
So how much less valuable is "industrial grade" diamond as opposed to "gemstone" grade???
Just out of curiosity.
Katherine
Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 | 05:59 AM
Mark-n-Jen:
It's hard to be specific...but a whole lot less valuable! As Padego says, industrial grade diamonds are commonly used...well, in industry! To cut things!
Of course, only very small amounts are used at a time (almost like diamond dust), but the cost is not such that it is prohibitive to the companies involved.
The diamonds that are used for gemstones, of course, can fetch several million dollars depending on how large and how well-cut they are. They are a higher quality, but the price is far more dependent on those two factors: size and the quality of the cutting used. A few small well-cut stones will have a lesser value than one large stone of the same quality. Also keep in mind what a difficult job it is to cut diamonds: one slip and you can ruin a large stone completely.
And then we have the whole DeBeers driving-up-prices thing that I don't even want to get into...
padego Member
Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 | 06:43 AM
In regards to DeBeers, keep in mind they are not the force that they used to be. There are many other players in the game including Australians, Russians and now we Canadians (currently number three in production) Diamond mining is incredibly exspensive, the latest mine in Canada, Diavek, sunk 500 million dollars into set up etc. before it even pulled a diamond out of the ground.
Many mines are controlled by consortiums such as the above primarily because of the costs involved.
Python
Posted: Sat May 14, 2005 | 06:45 PM
I like the one called rocko Y rollo (rock & roll, if you can't guess)...
pretty colors...
Ponygirl
Posted: Sun May 15, 2005 | 06:32 PM
The Cullinan and others were big news not simply because they were big stones, but because they produced huge GEM-QUALITY cut stones. Emphasis on gem-quality.
Diamonds themselves are much more common than the mining companies and jewelry stores would have you believe. I particularly hate the new trend of 'black diamond' jewelry...it's just a way to market diamonds that're so crappy and filled with carbon inclusions that they look black. But that's just my taste, I suppose.
