Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Flag Resources (FGR.A A) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jbr29 who wrote (2858)	3/20/2000 7:58:00 AM
From: Stephen Mooney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4269

Good Day jbr29, Ali, and ALL. Ali - The people at Stockhouse must be scratching their heads as I've never once posted over there. GEE, I wonder who it is that is continuing their (her) vindictive misinformation campaign? Here little piggy, here little piggy, we're over here. Come play with us. Tell us again how you can't understand all the things Murdo says on ALL those occasions you have spoken with him. jbr29 - Thanks for reminding us of that very good article that Karl posted. I have to point out, however, that you have to be very careful when comparing the Sudbury anomaly and the Wanapitei anomaly and the crater impact areas etc. From a quick reading of your post it would seem that you are implying that the Sudbury anomaly and the Sudbury impact crater are one and the same thing and similarly that the Wanapitei crater and Wanapitei anomaly are synonymous terms. This is simply not the case. For clarification purposes, I point out that the Wanapitei impact crater is roughly the same surface area as the present Wanapitei Lake while the Wanapitei anomaly is a much larger area and is, in fact, a huge magnetic and gravitational anomaly roughly equal in size to the Sudbury anomaly. From the article we understand that the impact craters are from different historical epochs, however I am still not sure if the origin of the anomalies is similarly well defined. There are many interesting geological questions that we are touching on here. One small part of that article that I need explained to me is, '...After Sudbury was initially excavated, magmas from deep in the crust invaded the breccia...' Does anybody know what this means, 'After Sudbury was initially excavated...'? Have a great week all, (as we continue to bite our nails over the finding of massive sulfides in the deep hole!) BTW - An interesting point is that while we were all getting ourselves in a frenzy over the shallow holes at Rathbun it was the deep hole that Murdo has been excited about all along, at least this is the impression that was given me by those who spoke with him BEFORE the release of the recent Rathbun assay. Am I correct? Ali? Ed?