Stropo thanks for the posts I've been busy and haven't been able to respond. You are correct about chondrites,and I can definitely add to your knowledge (although the detailed post may need to come tomorrow) , what I've posted previously on hotcopper and twitter is about Cerium anomalies (and sorry to those who have seen me talk about this previously) which geologists commonly use as an indicator for ionic clay deposits.
The short summary is you can use normalised chondrite plots to look for Ce anomalies, this is where the cerium value has deviated from what would be found in a chondrite. These are strong indicators as to whether a deposit could be ionic (ph3+ (generally ph4) leach able for 30min at ambient temperatures) with ammonium sulphate. Usually you see a negative Ce anomaly which is a negative spike in the charts that I posted. Now I only posted two drill holes but you could do the entire lot of course.
All your favourite IAC have this kind of anomaly, generally negative but could be positive. MEI, VMM, IXR, ABX, DEV, and basically all your China deposits. Generally at surface you see a positive Ce anomaly and as you on work further down that quickly turns to a negative Ce anomaly.
That's the short summary, I'm on mobile but feel free to google cerium negative anomalies and you can find some extremely researched papers.
Any good geo these days looking at REEs is using these as indicators.
As always the proof is in the pudding (the met work) but I've seen knowledge geos say they've never seen an IAC without a Ce anomaly.
To date I've seen no such Ce anomalies with VMS. Which is why in a previous post I compared this to other clay based non ionic hopefuls in Southwest WA such as OD6, MRD, WC1.
Hope that helps with some light reading. As for whatever the other guy is on about in trolling the MD, must be getting me mixed up with someone else LOL or there's just a few posters who can't help but write the word 'troll' in everyone of there posts whilst adding nothing to the conversation.
(20min delay)