SI
SI
discoversearch

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: jpthoma1 who wrote (5644)12/2/2002 8:46:42 PM
From: GeoDude  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 39344
 
Another interesting observation on CZZ - Meramax is that the good holes clearly drilled the nose of a fold (which probably thickened the section there). It also look that part of the fold has been eroded and we are only left with the overturned limb or maybe a lot more ... depending on the plunge of the fold.

So I agree with the pod theory and the obvious folding. It would be real interesting to see if each fold nose/core on the property has a pod.

But I will remain skeptical of the economic viability of the project until a second pod is found ... This is not like Voisey Bay as everyone knows already.

Having said that I will buy the stock if it ever goes back below $1.25 ...

Luck all.

LIA



To: jpthoma1 who wrote (5644)12/4/2002 12:36:53 AM
From: hank2010  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 39344
 
JP They drilled a vertical hole and got an intercept of 27 m then angled two more to the south from the same set-up and got longer intercepts. Sure looks like down dip to me. Why did they not drill a hole in the opposite direction to get an idea of what true width was or, at the very least help solve the problem of complexity? And thereby prevent suspicious minds from second guessing them!