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 : Gold and Silver Mining Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumell who wrote (1029)	5/18/2001 2:51:43 PM
From: Brumell	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4051

A little perspective. Two lines of very high readings are 1.5 kms apart at E1 North anomaly. At E1 South anomaly 3 kms to the south (on the other side of a deep arroyo) similar very high readings are found. Typical width is a minimum 100 meters on west side of anomalies. If we take the contamination theory, let's assume high readings of 4% zinc only go 0.5 metres deep. Let's also be very conservative and assume total length of highly enriched area at only 2 kms x 100 metres wide. On the above very conservative basis, there would be a minimum 100,000 cu. meters of highly enriched material. Considering that a large earth mover as used for road building can hold about 25 cu. metres, it would have taken 4,000 loads to deposit this material. 4,000 loads is a lot of trips and material.... a major contract... and remember we are being very conservative. Further, it was dumped on either side of a deep arroyo. In reality, it had to have been dumped over a length exceeding 8 kms. Perhaps the above happened but I find it highly unlikely.