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 : Donner Minerals (DML.V) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: david f. dempster who wrote (2025)	12/10/1997 10:56:00 PM
From: Walt	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 11676

No doubt Vaughn will give you a better explanation later but if you read his post 1442 and 1731 you will get a better idea of what he is refering to. You have the Nain gabbro/troctolite sitting on top of the Churchill basement gneiss. Holes 67 and 75 hit the massive sulphides above the contact and hole 66 hit a massive band of mineralization below the contact. What does this mean. Maybe the gabbro/troctolite cut through a sulphide zone or maybe the sulphides got remobilized into the gneisses. Maybe they are related, maybe not, which came first the chicken or the egg. At Voiseys Bay the sulphides settled at the bottom of the troctolite. These are a couple of many explanations and without all the drill hole logs etc it is difficult to say. Hope this helps your project Walt

To: david f. dempster who wrote (2025)	12/11/1997 10:27:00 AM
From: VAUGHN	Respond to of 11676

Hello David Terry or Feline are more qualified than I to answer your question but I'll try. There are two structural provinces (old continents) here. The Nain (gabro) has slammed into and ridden up over the Churchill (gniess). The ore under a VB model should be found on top of the gniess and in faults. In hole 75 it was found below the gniess/gabro contact within the body of the gniess. It apparently has metalergical characteristics that indicate that it was not remobilized. Two possibilities in my mind. 1. There was a fault in the gniess and the most concentrated ore was injected into it from the diseminated sulfides in the gabro above, or 2. Some ultramafic intrusion under or through the gniess emplaced the ore there. If the later, the source probably is different from the source of the 67 and 96 holes. That is just my conjecture and not based on geological credentials. Terry probably should correct me here if necessary. Hope this helps. Regards