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 : Canadian-under $3.00 Stock-Picking Challenge -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russet who wrote (7010)	3/8/2002 1:45:01 AM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 11802

I used to work for Tintina Mines and Birch Mountain in Alberta doing placer testing and other work. I panned many streams in Alberta on their ground and found lots of gold. This has been known about since 1930 but no one knows the source. Tintina thought they were low sulphide Carlin type limestones that locally were contributing to the rivers that ran gold in the sediment. But jarosite and other Carlin alteration was not there. No silica. Some of the limestone was rusty and had sulphides and streams running through them were locally auriferous. The Rockies are about 150 miles west and were thought by the long distance transport sect to be a possible source, glacially enriched. I doubt that that is the case as water usually does local washing, and transport almost always disperses too much to get much reconcetrate, otherwise terminal moraines would all be mines where they were cut by rivers. Most placers have point sources origins. Some of the limestone did fire assay in spots, and Lac Minerals, before they were taken over, did about 6 months assaying of their own ground before doing more drilling. Their geologists said they were finding stuff but it was hard to put together. When Lac was taken over by Barrick they dropped all the ground. The limestone is on a fault, Sewatuck which cuts Yellowknife too. Up the fault comes bitumen from the tar sands. Such tar sand metal deposits are known about in 4 other areas of the world. Texas, Russia, Venezuela and Australia. They are extremely hard to assay as they are preg robbers that screw up both fire and solution assay with carbon pre precipitation. Nevertheless both Suncor and Syncrude Engineers I talked to told me that both companies had plans to install tailings metal recovery plants when processes had been perfected. The trouble is determination and recovery. Nano clusters may have a right to exist. But right now this work is highly tenuous and theoretical. There is fine gold in seawater too. I think I may know how to take it out. It has a method and it may be better than break even, but it has its problems. For one thing there is the 3% salt that you have to get rid of first. EC<:-}

To: russet who wrote (7010)	3/8/2002 1:47:48 AM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 11802

I like Wildcat Resources. pages.ca.inter.net

To: russet who wrote (7010)	3/8/2002 1:49:14 AM
From: Miner	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 11802

Hope you guys don't mind me interrupting your conversation but you might be interested in a short course I just attended February 20th, called "Mining Stock Scams - how to identify, police and eliminate them!" put on by UBC in Vancouver. You guys could have added to a lively discussion there. Nano-gold was a topic. I personally believe that if you can't find it in a fire assay then it isn't there, but that's just me. (and everybody I know and work with in the industry). Check out cerm3.mining.ubc.ca if you are interested, the course material might be found there or contact Dr. John Meech at the university. I suspect that nano-gold is not real, but even if it were, most nano materials cost upwards of $500 per gram or in that range, so I would infer that to produce this gold if it existed would cost in that range too. Sounds like Alchemy (you could turn lead into gold, or coal into diamond but the cost would mean it wouldn't be worth it, at least today). regards, john