Nuinsco Resources (NWI) Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Nuinsco Resources (NWI)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: mineman who wrote (2202)	3/23/1999 1:21:00 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) of 5821

Well first of all the Gabbro itself is not 120 metres wide. It is the embayment or channel that is 120 metres wide in the one section. It may be wider in other sections. There is no way of telling. As I have said and is in evidence in many tomes of literature it matters not how big the gabbro is or was as to the size of the underlying orebody. This is an observed and frequently mentioned fact. The thickness of the orebody and its grade has nothing whatever to do with the size of the body. Eight repetition of this obervation. If it did then half the orebodies at Lynn Lake and Thompson would not exist as they were associated with quite small intrusions. If it were true that you could easily correlate size of intrusion to size of ore then there would be no need to look at small gabbro bodies at all. But experience tells us that this is not so. Again, I am working from fact not theory. We have to form the theory taking fact into account. If a melt come to the surface that is a cubic mile in size with one surface exposed, thermal theory tells us it needs 1,000,000 years to cool to room temperature. Plenty of time to differentiate I would think. EC<:-}

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next