Julius, you are living in a world of make believe. tell me something, you are intelligent. what purpose did brex have in crusing the cores before shipping out the 750gram sample? why didn't they just send out the core, give instuctions on how to process it and then let the assayer come to a conclusion. And it was not until sometime in 1996, that Brex came clean about the coarseness of the gold and the use of the cyanide leach technique. Give me an example of one other credible company that crushes material before sending it to the assayer. When I say crush, I mean by the assay crew on site independent of interference from the mining company itself. What horse shit is going on here.
Let me give you a similar example. You say you have a placer concession. You show me all of the placer gold you have found. You want to sell me the concession. You give me all types of statistics, the amount gravel processed over what period of time etc. but you won't let me verify your data by doing my own processing of the gravels on site. This is a suckers game, what are you hiding? Brex did the same thing. But you fail to see the ruse here. Why? Why did they not let anyone test independently, drill and process the core? Give me an explanation for this. You don't have one and either does Brex.
2.Brex specifically said Respected consulting firm Strathcona Mineral
Services had told Bre-X Minerals that resource estimates at the Busang gold project in Indonesia had been placed in doubt "because of invalid samples and assaying of those samples."
That size is relatively coarse for gold grains, and the results differ from the evidence Felderhof and Bre-X geologists Jonathan Nassey and Cesar Puspos presented in a paper on the geology of the
project area. In that report, the geologists said "gold dominantly occurs in free native form and as submicroscopic particles in pyrite-arsenopyrite and as a minor amount in electrum occluded in
sphalerite." Gold inclusions in the Busang sulphides -- sulphides that are themselves fine-grained --would usually be less than a tenth the size of the sulphide grain, more likely 10 to 40 microns than
100 to 400. And gold assays are much more reproducible if the gold particles are smaller
The second objection was detailed in a report from brokerage house Lehman Brothers in 1996 --that "gold [at Busang] is about 90% free, loose and powder-like . . . [rock] is fractured, which
makes for delicate cores. The more you split up and cut the core, the more gold falls off."Weathered cores from the shallow parts of the drill holes are, indeed, fairly fragile, though it is
debatable whether splitting would actually disturb gold anywhere but on the core surfaces. The unweathered core is generally competent -- after all, it is strongly silicified -- and is unlikely to have
"loose" gold. Moreover, if splitting or sawing core causes gold to fall off, even more gold should be lost in the process of diamond drilling, which is far more mechanically disruptive than either splitting or sawing.
The other serious flaw in the Bre-X sampling methodology is the on-site crushing, which leaves the company open to the charge that tampering could have taken place. Freeport's report that there
were "visual differences" between its own samples and Bre-X's imply that Freeport is worried about tampering because it is hard to know what other tampering may have taken place.
Read this CAREFULLY
Australian metallurgical consulting firm Normet noted, in a July 1996 report to Bre-X, that the gold in samples from Busang was mainly 100 to 400 microns (0.1 to 0.4 mm) across, and that "gold particle shapes were mostly rounded with beaded outlines." The head grades were
typical of Busang: 2.5 to 4.4 grams gold per tonne.The description of the shapes is consistent with a placer source; gold from lodes is most often described as "delicate" or "wiry" in shape, and advanced rounding is often taken as evidence that the gold has been abraded -- as would happen in erosion and deposition of a placer gold, or in the
milling of gold grains in a glacial till.
Normet also tested gravity concentration on the Busang material, finding that 91% of the gold could be recovered in a Knelson concentrator. Such high recoveries in a simple gravity circuit are unusual in a hard-rock gold environment. What does the above say? it says that the gold was typical of placer gold. what do you think that they are going to come out say this is placer gold and get sued. The preponderance of the data is against brex right now because they have no valid invormation. Where are you coming from in defending them. Just process all of the information release by bRex and you find a trail of inconsistencies. if you are a proponent of brex, why don't you get substantive answers from them. why don't they address any of these handling technigues. who had custody of the drill cores and when etc. this has nothing to do with the awaited results. come clean, they have not. an innocent man will defend himself, what is their excuse.
3. Felderhoff was not acting as a senior geologist, that was only his title. deguzman and his guys kept a tite lip on his fellow workers.
4. they were holding off the day of reconning by continue to drill.
5. wait and see, the truth is almost at hand
6. slices, dices, ridiculous. give out the whole court. what do you have to hide
7. another incoherent statement, now you are saying that gold fell out of the core. i guess they drilled swiss cheese like drill cores and the gold said, " i see a way out. lets go before they grind us up" this must be a new one.
8. fcx said this? inconclusive? relating to their results. come on now. |
