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 : WillP Speaks on Winspear -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: marcos who wrote (54)	2/23/1999 5:52:00 PM
From: wayne cath	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 177

Author: WillP -- Date:1999-02-23 14:12:34 Subject: (Kimber) Lite at the End of the Tunnel OK...first things first. I tend to agree with the comment in your post attributed to George Albino, "getting lucky with one diamond is possible, but that with three stones each carrying a substantial part of the parcel's value the likelihood that the very high valuation obtained for the Snap Lake diamonds is grossly inflated is we believe, small." The key word upon which my agreement rests, however, is 'grossly'. However, I have some questions for you, teevee. These questions (ya had to see this a-commin!) pertain to the geological terminology you use in your rebuttal. :-) Now I'm not going to argue what you said too strenuously. As a slight example, I feel many geologists or pseudogeologists get confused with 'diatreme' myself. However...here are my questions for now: I think the answers to these questions...in strictly layman terminology...would be of immense value to the readers out there. #1. Could you explain in layman's terms the circumstances that 'diatreme facies' typically form? #2. What is the 'emplacement process' by which hypabyssal kimberlite is...well, umm...emplaced? #3. What's the disctinction between 'hypabyssal', 'diatreme', 'epiclastic' and 'pyroclastic' as applied to kimberlites? #4. If your 'type II' kimberlite enjoyed a smoother ride to the surface, as evidenced by less breakage, etc...then why is the notion of encountering a more or less intact rich nodule...harzburgite, eclogite...so far fetched...a la Kaiser? #5. Most of the...umm...ore described by Winspear is 'hypabyssal kimberlite'. I don't recall any other descriptive term being used, although I'm relying on a failing memory. Others have inferred that the 'breccia' intersections are diatremes, however. Why is this? Are all breccias diatremes by definition therefore? :-) #6. What is this idea of 'multiple emplacement', and how is it applicable to Snap Lake? Explain the process how this could have occurred under the northwest peninsula of Snap Lake...say a 'lamproite emplacement' followed by one of those pesky 'diatreme' suckers occurring under extreme phreatomagmatic conditions about 10 to 20 million years later. :-) #7. What's this about rapid cooling? What's the significance of the cooling rate. Does this have any bearing, directly or indirectly, on the terms 'hypabyssal' and 'diatreme'? #8. I keep hearing about 'hypabyssal type II kimberlite. Does this imply there is a 'hypabyssal type I kimberlite'? A 'type II diatreme'? 'Type II pyroclastic kimberlite'? Well..that's about it for now. I don't want to burden you with too many questions all at once. I realize not all of these questions sprang from your post above...but I thought you might enjoy the chance to take a crack at them. As an aside...I noted some time ago that one of your SI 'boo-birds' posted a link to one of your dated posts on the Winspear thread. I suspect the intent was to destroy your credibility. This post of yours was somewhat doubtful of Snap Lake's prospects. The time of this post of yours was early fall, as I recall. Again, relying on failing memory...I believe your primary concern about Snap Lake was one of tonnage. To this, I have one final question...and a comment. QUESTION: What event occurred in mid fall to change your opinion of Snap Lake so dramatically? (I can think of several plausible answers.) COMMENT: One's credibility increases when one exhibits the ability to change one's mind with the arrival of new information. I'm not sure what the boo-bird poster's intent was, but it almost certainly had the opposite effect upon me. Answering the questions above in layman terms would continue that process. It is in that spirit that I ask them. Regards, WillP