Ann: Gov NDIBK04 Data Confirms IOCG/ISCG Model for Mt Lamb, page-58

It's not clear in the 29.3.21 ICG announcement where the 4% chalcopyrite by volume figure came from. They seem to imply it came from the MinEx CRC Hylogger data. I have not been able to access the Hylogger data.

I noticed this table posted by Kalenn on 6.3.21 (https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/51571644/single) which was the first time I saw the 4% figure:

Hole_ID	m From	m To	Sulph Min 1			Sulph Min 2			Sulp Min 3			Sulphide Total
				style	%		style	%		style	%
NDIBK04	411.8	412.93	Pyrrhotite	Vein Selvage	7	bor	Vein Selvage	2	Pyrite	Vein Selvage	1	10
	412.93	413.59	Pyrrhotite	Vein Selvage	3	Pyrite	Vein Selvage	2				5
	413.7	414.12	Pyrrhotite	Vein Selvage	5	bor	Vein Selvage	1	Pyrite	Vein Selvage	1	7
	414.12	416.3	Chalcopyrite	Vein Selvage	4	Pyrrhotite	Vein Selvage	1				5

I also noticed Kalenn said on 15.4.21 (https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/52497454/single) "keep in mind the numbers we have to date are off PXRF (portable xrf readers) they only measure the mineral content in a tiny spot on the surface of the core. The assays are going to start painting the real picture."I understand Hylogger and PXRF are different technologies.If in fact the 4% chalcopyrite by volume came from PXRF, then Kalenn's warning may be pertinent to the disparity and backs up J&J's cherry picking comment.