Looking for some input from you all here around Mawson's geophysics modelling. I'm finding it very confounding. Are the modelled plates to date still relevant for finding targets? Or are we now relying solely on geochem signatures from aircore drills to look for the next intrusion?
July 2019's announcement (screenshot below) was very promising in that there were more than a dozen EM plates modelled out, and excitingly some of them also overlapped with surface geochem anomalies which supported the theory that it's a multiple intrusion complex.
When they decided to use low frequency EM to hone in on targets, D5 and D1 got modelled wildly different to the original MLTEM model (D5 derived from the LFEM was a 180-degree flip to the D5 modelled from the MLTEM).
Even more confounding was then drill 005 that went into the heart of the LFEM D5 found nothing, and instead it was a late call to drill right under the geochem footprint (drill 007 & 008, outside of the modelled D5 plate) that brought us this fantastic story to date.
Do you think that the dozen of modelled plates to date are still relevant, given that the successful drills to date didn't seem to correlate to any of the MLTEM and LFEM work last year (obviously the down hole EM in drill 007 worked wonders)?
@lezok I see you had a history of modelling Nova back in the day but not sure if you were doing structural modelling or geophysics modelling. Wondering if you have any thoughts on this =)
Love to hear from you all here.
BFZ
LEG Price at posting:
15.0¢ Sentiment: Hold Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)