InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 23
Posts 764
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 09/12/2002

Re: basserdan post# 397

Friday, 08/26/2005 8:50:31 AM

Friday, August 26, 2005 8:50:31 AM

Post# of 1213
I think, for the most part, ECharter's comments have been addressed in a proper and gentlemanly manner and have been found to be lacking in substance

Well, I would not go that far. What has not been proved is the assertion that the mini-bulk channels in fact run in a uniform fashion across 487 feet.

Do you feel that has been proved, ubiquitous quartz minerals notwithstanding?

I don't know too many geologists who would when confronted with 500 feet of cross section of a formation would say "Hey! lets make these itty bitty samples all one big sample! Let's throw it all in on pot and see what comes out!, Waddya say?"

I would expect they would get fired for that.

On the other hand being lionized in an investor forum would be a distinct possibility too.

I find most of what Blair says about seeing mineral across the whole formation or finding low grade uniform mineral for certain sections of indefinite width in other areas unconvincing.

The visual assay has all too often been found to be specious in the past. That is why God invented channel sampling and bade geologists to divide these sample up according to the rock formations encountered in the section.
I believe you will find it in Deuteronomy.

EC<:-}

Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.