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 : ASHTON MINING OF CANADA (ACA) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DIAMOND JIM who wrote (5995)	8/7/1998 9:27:00 AM
From: ddl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7966

Thanks DJ... civil yes, surprised we are?, a BIG YES considering the fact that the results were expected in every way to be at the least similar to the original small sampling... I have a question. If what K-91 is in, is kimberlite, and knowing that this lava flow is not always perfectly homogonized but somewhat normally similar, then how can carat counts differ from 137c/100t to 10c/100t when the holes are only 75' away from each other? I have to assume the following... 1) K-91 is not in kimberlite material 2) if there was kimberlite material, then it was only for a very thin section. 3) The drill holes penetrated new depths not previously reported on and we are therefore comparing apples to oranges. . Anyone?