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 : Montello Resources -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: david f. dempster who wrote (2265)	7/25/1998 9:44:00 AM
From: JP	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4256

THIS IS A POST THAT I PUT ON THE MMU THREAD. IT PERTAINS TO MEO SO I WILL THROW IT ON HERE AS WELL. JP <<There are surface protrusions that very well may be kimberlite>> Leigh -if this was the case they would have chipped off some and sent it in long ago for testing. Kimberlite is much harder than sedimentary rock so it should be obvious. Keep in mind that this area (Marums) has been drilled like swiss cheese by the oil industry and no one has ever hit kimberlite. When I tell my Calgary geologist buddies that I am investing in diamonds in Alberta they mostly laugh and say good luck. The basement is very deep in this area and gets closer to the surface as you move away from the mountains. This is contrary to how most people picture the Peace River Arch. The Arch is a positive feature on the basement but the slope of the basement is greater than the uplifting feature of the Arch. Jesse is correct when he says the axis of the arch is South of the both ACA and MMU but the Axis is defined as where a single plane (the axial plane) intersects the arch at 90 degrees to the surface of the basement.(This is a vertical plane) This is just a hypothetical line because it is based upon a single plane for the whole arch. This means that the actual high point of the arch as you move away from the mountains could be almost anywhere and snake around. My personal belief is that the high point of the arch as you move away from the mountains is the most likely source of the roots of the kimberlite which would surface at the Ashton location. The high point of the arch then heads in the Ft.McMurray direction - I am hoping that it eventually is the cause of the two faults that come from Lake Athabaska and head down thru Legend block and then join ACA. ( This is why I like MEO and ALR these days).I think that the chance of finding kims increases more going eastward from Ashton -not westward. Marum thought that it would be straight forward drilling when they first went in. That is why they talked of surface -vegetation anomolies- because they thought that it was going to be easy to hit the kimberlite. The Feb 25 (i think) news release on Marums web page says that they were looking for kims in their drilling. It was when they didn't hit anything that they changed their tune to be looking for indicators. The initial assumptions they were making illustrate that they thought that the kims would be right under the surface. They were wrong. If glaciation gouged thru this area -like Marum says-then the indicators could be down in the Northern states -not even on Marums property. Out here in Alberta you can find surface diamonds quite easily. Some of the older guys I work with say they used to pick them up out of the ruts in the dirt roads. Does this mean that there is kimberlite there -not likely the diamonds could have come from the NWT. Marum may find something but don't get too excited. I could send two undergrad geologists up there for the summer and still say the same that MMU is saying. As always this is just my opinion. JP (this should liven up the thread<grin>)