I have to make this quick because its really late Tomato.
My source was not specific by what was meant by the use of that term. Since he/she was saying that EM was effective on this ground while resistvity was not, I took it to mean the characteristic "bulls-eye" coloured magnetic survey graphics displayed over a number of pipes up here. Other things, certain lake bottoms, etc. have proven to give similar readouts but of course they do not have G-10 and Ilminite, etc. geochemical trains down ice from them unless they are kimberlites.
Yes, I believe both Diamet and Aber had "bulls-eye EM readouts on some of their pipes, but if I am not mistaken, I believe others were indistinguishable from background magnetics.
I am told that there are geochemical trains all over the Back Lake, Snap Lake and Camsell Lake properties, many with distinct and unique geochemical and proximity to source signatures. Multiple narrow ones within wider ones, some criss crossed and some in line with last known ice flows. It is a "jigsaw puzzle" and it is driving more than one geologist nuts.
I would question anyone providing you with "material" information suggesting he knew in advance what another company was going to announce. Its not unheard of but be cautious.
Regarding Aber, I am out of time here but have a look at my last post on that thread.
Hope this helped.
Regards |
