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 : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John McCarthy who wrote (40726)	5/22/2007 1:58:34 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78431

Who said free? Bill is in the mail. As I presume your cheque will be too...

To: John McCarthy who wrote (40726)	5/22/2007 2:47:02 PM
From: E. Charters	Respond to of 78431

And to really flog a dying horse, and to further confuse you, when you cluck that lunk, about Kambalda deposits.. (I am sure you will, or there could be trouble..) then pay attention to what Fleet proposed in 1977 about hydrothermal origins of sulfide deposits of even the Sudbury type. Naldrett would think me a loon for proposing this idea, and no doubt many others do, for other reasons, and I am not arguing the loonar origins of the thought, but I aver, albeit rather lamely, that this hydrothermal, or water concept, may become more important in subsequent exploration models of the future in mafic environments. So what if few to practically no one else agrees? The idea is to be right about things, and if no one else for even one second can reason why you would want to be right, or how it matters, let alone whether you are or not, then it must matter ... from a basic principle that one can very confidently state: "Most people are wrong about most things, most of the time." Unfortunately, even if one maximally disagrees with the most number of people, upon deeper reflection the comfort one derives from this philosophy is short lived, as we can infer there is no requirement that the majority who are wrong must also agree. EC<:-}