SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Naxos Resources (NAXOF)
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Larry Brubaker who wrote (6952)12/11/1997 2:12:00 AM
From: Bear Down   of 20681
 
I agree on the weaselly part. My only remaining question is if it is the Johnson methodology that is really on trial here, why not just take samples, split them and use Johnson/Lett on one and standard FA on the other, release all results and let us see for ourselves the difference. This way COC wouldn't even matter. If the difference was as much as Naxos says it is no one could scream "SALTING" If however standard FA returned similar numbers as Johnson/Lett we would all know Naxos has a "busang" type deposit. Why tell me "the process" is so great and then not compare results on identical samples to traditional methods. This would not take long to do and would end any doubt as to the actual benefits of Johnson/Lett. Then Ledoux could immediatly certify results because COC would be irrelevant, as long as they split the sample themselves, and assayed both ways and came up with different results. It would then be undisputable as to whether the "process" was the difference
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News