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 : Diamonds North Resources Ltd -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kidl who wrote (239)	10/18/2003 5:20:43 AM
From: VAUGHN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 334

Hello kidl Off the top of my head I'm afraid I don't know and would have to do a great deal of research and guess work to arrive at a reasonable answer for you, but if I had to use a crystal ball, I would say that it may either have something to do with the geochemistry of those two bodies, earlier sample micro-diamond counts, the size of those bodies vs the smaller size of some others, the intrusive age of the bodies perhaps is different and/or the compositional nature of those kimberlites possibly being different from those found elsewhere along the GS. But like I said, that's just a guess. Have a good weekend. Vaughn