"So this is you admitting that Fig 11 provided greater detail to...

"So this is you admitting that Fig 11 provided greater detail to you.Point proven."

No Fig 11 did not provide any more detail other than a different pink colour depicting the Upper **bronorite above the dark Red Reef, there were no additional descriptions of rock types nor any annotation of grades, no additional details.

"Do you think I'm here to play one of these spot the difference games that I used to play as a kid? Yes"
Thats exactly what investors would be doing with drilling and exploration announcements. Details matter, grades and thickness matter - @2ic used the data provided to calculate those intervals in the extract of his Excel sheet - your argument didn't address his numbers - are you saying that grades and thickness in drill holes and on cross-sections don't matter in exploration announcements?

Where did I talk about the colour scheme?
Exactly right - again @2ic and now myself have pointed out that the change in colour scheme served no useful purpose other than to make the implications about the Upper **bronorite being somehow a potentially mineralized zone or possibly economic mineralization, there is no geological reason why a Upper **bronorite needs to be pink in colour, and thats why in the earlier diagram Fig.3 it is colored green which is fairly conventional for mafic type units without significant mineralization. So awaiting your reply to having this pointed out to you.

Don't make people hold your hand and walk you through the differences in Fig.3 and Fig.11 again. Take a good look at them and consider the additional data that @2ic has offered and come back to us if you can recognize the difference in the two figures and suggest a reason why they appear so different.