Wow, there is very little truth in that "DD" post - almost every statement made is either misleading or outright false.
This is a map showing the heavy mineralization of the direct and surrounding area:
No, that is false. That is a geological map showing rock units and structures. No mineralization is shown on that map.
This is a map from NRCan that shows mineral discoveries and where:
Note that the ACRL claims are south of the Larder Lake fault, and there are mighty few mineral occurrences shown on ACRL claims.
Here is a Map of all the reported drilling of our direct area:
Here is a map of our Kirkland Lake mining claims:
Yup, almost no drilling on ACRL claims. There is a reason for that - little to no chance of a significant mineral discovery. Geologists have been looking in this area for a hundred years, and the consensus is that there is little reason to drill.
Here is the money shot. The main Fault is Larder Lake. Many sub-faults run off the main fault. "Rivers of Gold" per local experts:
A hand-drawn map from whom? I have my doubts, but let's assume it is reliable. The problem with your logic is that most faults are not mineralized. A fault crossing or intersecting a mineralized fault may be post or pre-mineralization and may be (and usually is) completely barren.
Your "money shot" is worthless.
Who doesn't understand that the Mancassa mine is under 2 Air miles from ACRL Property, along the same exact fault?
That is another false statement. It is not the "exact fault" that runs through the ACRL properties. Two miles away is close but might as well be a hundred miles away.
Do your own research, use third-party sources, and don't buy into the hype.
