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 Diamond Play Cafi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Charters who wrote (474)	1/15/2003 2:19:22 PM
From: VAUGHN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16206

Hello Eric We will have to agree to disagree about my being wrong or right regarding Sobolev criteria, keeping in mind that I do not dispute the correlation you reference, simply that the postulation does not account for the variables I listed. Yes the Misty Lake garnets are from soil samples, not hardrock however, if they were from core, they would be extremely attractive and hardly bearish by any stretch. As you know G10's are all subcalic to a greater or lesser degree along a graduated diagonal Cr/CaO division with G9's and all kimberlite diamond mines contain a range of G10 pyropes, not simply the ones that meet the Soblev criteria!Some kimberlite mines contain lower Cr/CaO %'s and some higher, but always falling within the G10 division and always reflecting a higher number/% of G10's than are found in barren or uneconomic pipes. As you know, some kimberlites contain relatively low numbers of pyropes and larger numbers of Chromites, but the NWT and RSA mine geologists I have had many long and informative discussions with up here (Yellowknife) have always confirmed the G10/G9 % correlation. You are of course entitled to your opinion Eric but please allow for the possibility at least that you are not infallible and that others may hold opinions based on some experience and knowledge in the field. Best Regards Vaughn