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 : Precious and Base Metal Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: geoffb_si who wrote (115)	10/11/2001 2:57:19 PM
From: Claude Cormier	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Geoff, 1) Good point. 3)The problem is where is the source. That is why I was not to happy to see that they could't get a JV and get all the money they need to fully explore this thing. The zinc is somewhere but will they find it with the little money they will obtain from the pp. I would also had that the presence of that silver in solid from cornfields and this small vat leaching operation is another positive indication.

To: geoffb_si who wrote (115)	10/11/2001 4:21:07 PM
From: jpthoma1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 39344

Hi Geoff. Well, if it's not from below, it must be from above!!!!!!!!!!!! ;o)) Let me explain my point (hope you have a small backgroung in geology) First let's have a look at the historical geology of this area. From the report: Four formations of Cretaceous age make up the uppermost portion of the stratigraphic sequence in the Charcas area: the Taraises and Cupido Formations comprised of argillaceous limestone with iron nodules; the La Pena Formation comprised of calcareous shale and argillaceous limestone with black chert bands; and the Cuesta del Cura Formation, of Albian to Cenomanian, age that is made up of limestone with argillaceous intercalations and black chert bands. The Eocene-age El Temeroso quartz-latite porphyry stock is central to the mineralization of the Charcas district. This intrusive is not large: at its present level of exposure it measures only 1,300 meters north-south by 400 meters in width. Numerous rhyolite dikes occupy regional east-trending and north-trending fractures. Isolated outcrops of tuff containing quartz and potassium feldspar in a pumicite groundmass, and reddish-brown rhyolite containing quartz, potassium feldspar and sodic plagioclase occur in the area. The Laramide Orogeny of early Tertiary age was the dominant structural event in the region and developed tight to open folds with well-developed axial clevage and a north to north-west trend. This deformational fabric is superimposed upon east-trending faults that developed during the Jurassic and were subsequently reactivated. The intrusion of the El Temeroso stock generated radial and peripheral fractures. As you realize, the oldest and still visible sedimentary rocks in this area are of Cretaceous age (between 66 and 144 millions of years). They were later intruded by the El Temereso stock during the Eocene period (50 millions years ago), mineralized by this intrusive and later uplifted and folded by the Laramide orogeny. You must notice that the El Temereso stock is slightly exposed, which means that when it intruded 50 millions years ago, there were probably thousands of feet of rocks ABOVE it. And within these now eroded rocks, the stock may have given birth to one or many small skarn type mineral deposits (these deposits tend to occur above and on the side of intrusives). But unfortunately, this «above today's ground level» deposit and the overlying rocks has disappeared because EROSION was the dominant geological process during the last 40 to 50 millions years (and believe me, it's a long period of time!). The anomaly may then be the last remnant of this deposit. The other explanation is contamination by previous human activity. But I believe that Mosher, who has been in the field, would have been able to confirm it, if it was so. You should note that I have neither been in the field (I would love to be there to try to confirm my hypothesis), nor sit at the negociation table as you said (if such negociations really occured!). But this explanation is the main reason why I have sold my PLY shares during the days following the publication of the Mosher's report, as a lot of others did. The «truth machine» will tell if we were wrong. Regards. JP