cc: Aurelian File
Message 22648523
ARU has also stated they believe they are looking at a system that has had several mineralizing and potential remobilization events,...so is the angle of the veins representative of direction of mineralizing fluids in the first, second, third etc. event?, ...which fault was a structural determinate in the first, second, third?,
Don't know, not enough data presented.
The ancient water table level was likely located at the scinter (as per typical epithermal genesis),...and look where the scinter is located. The mineralization is typically found on one side or the other of the sinter depending on which direction the fluids flowed.
I think that the sinter can be used only as a very general guide at this time. Might only be erosional remnants preserved and not fully reflect the original distribution. Again, not enough information.
Drill holes will determine the types of rocks present and will give geologists telltale signs to determine where to look for nearby mineralization as the layers of rocks generally occur in a specific order. I haven't seen this analysis of rock types yet, have you?
I haven't seen anything other than the generalised rock sequence they show in the website maps and sections. They have talked about alteration minerals and geochemistry in outcrop above the blind mineralisation that led them to drill FDN: silicification and pyrite with elevated arsenic, antimony, barium and mercury in the conglomerate above the mineralisation. Very interesting is that they hit this same type of pathfinder alteration and chemistry in a drill hole (CP-06-48) about 600m west of B/LP. The hole was stopped in conglomerate, it did not reach the target volcanics below the conglomerate. (there is a slide for this in the Quicktime slide show on Aurelian's site). I think this may be above the faulted off western part of the FDN zone that has moved south. I could very well be wrong, but it fits my current thoughts on the type of movement on the faults in the area. At least their drilling shows potential for another blind Au target near to FDN and B/LP. This is interesting also for those who are trying to play this in Goldmarca as the drill hole looks like it is about 500 m SE of the SE corner of Golmarca's claim.
You're making a lot of assumptions and simplifying what could be a much more complex situation.
Yes, but it is based on data. Undoubtedly I am simplifying a complex system as there is not much data available, but I have to start somewhere. Just wish I could go look at core and outcrop!
If I put all the drill histograms together in a 3 d image I see a variable multiple vein system running through a mineralized block that is nearly perpendicular to ground level. It's the dip of that mineralized block I'm referring to. There is little gold outside that block. There may be something in the "assays pending" area to the west of the fault under the displaced sinter. Assays there are critical and seem to have been pending for quite a while. So far assays running deeper are tailing off in gold content. Maybe assays to the west will find a continuation of the system.
Assays to the North also seem to be tailing off in gold content. The system appears to be finding its limits along strike unless other blocks are to be found displaced by faulting.
When you say mineralised block, are you referring to the prism of host volcanics between the 2 major faults shown in the cross-sections? I have only modeled gold intercepts within that block, nothing to the west or east of the faults. I have made an initial order of magnitude resource estimate that comes up with about 6,000,000 ounces using data through hole 06-58. I have modeled gold zones in the drill holes as dipping 80 degrees west. That is only 10 degrees off of the orientation you are talking about. This is very preliminary, and doesn't yet assign any resource to line 9583500, but I don't think it is unreasonable. And don't forget about the 500,000 ounces in B/LP.
Message 22605572
Yes, it appears that the mineralisation is becoming more fragmented at depth (my model accounts for this) and, at least for now, weakening to the north. Will it keep weakening? I don' t know. If it keeps weakening then I think it is possible FDN may have only 8-9 million ounces. It's also possible that it may strengthen again to the north. Sometimes the high-grade zones can be like "beads on a string". But that's just to the north. We know nothing yet of the potential to the south between FDN and B/LP and the target that I talked about above, and the 30 other gold targets on the property.
Optimism is good in the markets, but in my experience 999 times out of a thousand it eventually results in losses if I don't sell down to freebies when everyone is pounding the table in blind optimism.
I agree. My standard operating procedure with jucos is to sell 1/2 on a double or sometimes 1/3 on a triple and then play with free shares. I have chosen on this one to not follow that way. I think US$20.00/share is about right for fair value right now for what we currently know, and that the upside potential is huge. It is, I think, one of those 1 in 10-20 year discoveries, think Voisey's bay, or Ekati.
Are you going to play with free shares or put in stink bids! You seem conflicted <gg>
Thanks, all very good questions and they force me to go back through and review my thoughts. |
