It is interesting to note that you burst on the Agoracom scene with postings that are clearly intended and designed to leave a negative connatation. It is also interesting to see that you did so by presenting documented financial data and number crunching that could, in your opinion, only serve to support the reason for your post.

At the very least, you very much did use a 'wide brush' when you 'alerted us' to the "facts of life". Numbers are an interesting thing and by themselves do not necessarily tell the whole story on all occasions. For example, when you referred to the costs and expenses for various items, you did so with out regard to the fact that just maybe that was the proper amount to spend for that item or those items. You did not take into account any change in direction the company felt to do, based on 'suspect areas' or recent discoveries. [overhead tests] You also did not take into account that they did get caught up into the "signs of the times" and had to 'switch horses mid stream' and consentrate on other endeavors AND 'hunker down' for a while. You also speak of further dilution as a natural outgrowth of their needing to spend [I suspect you mean waste] money to further this project. You might be correct there but I suspect [no hard proof offered] that they are going to be getting funding from various public and or private sources as the project advances. It might also be correct to say that they're will NOT be the dilution that you described [50 million more shares needed to cover expenses] in your highly subjective rendering. Perhaps, yes I know I just said perhaps, a J/V might help to alleviate said future espenses. Perhaps the metallurgical process might be worth money in some way or other. I personally think it is the ace in the hole that will separate Starfield from others.

In conclusion, I would like to submit to the forum that because you did not list all the accomplishments that the company has acheived from its inception [though you went back to the Glen Indra regime] and all the advancements that have been made to date, that your post is clearly one sided and suspect at the least. Let me ask you a couple of questions sir/maam.

What are your financial qualifications regarding each of the catagories you just posted about?

Are you a Starfield Resources shareholder?

If you are not a shareholder, then you took a certain amount of time to copy and paste those reported numbers for a reason. What was that reason sir/maam?

Was it to warn us of a 'corrupt or incompetant' leadership? Please explain.

Please answer those individual questions. Thank you

Respectfully submitted to the board at large.

Jerry Francis