Thanks for that SP. At a very minimum it sheds light on the...

Thanks for that SP. At a very minimum it sheds light on the questions the Geo's are faced with.
Presumably they'll tell us where they intend to site the next holes. Maybe even why.
Then which strands of your interpretation they favour will become apparent.

Note when RB made his comments on the video he just glibly said them and kept smiling absolutely no indication of how challenging the results seemed.
Then again he isn't a geo but is a good man manager.

It probably doesn't matter which elements you point out, they test first. It seems identifying the reason for the magnetic in conjunction with DHEM being more effective that surface EM is their preference. Remember the question you had for Jon Horonsky about the depth of effectiveness of EM and the answer being the orientation of the conducting plates.

Every series of holes should eliminate one of two largely binary outcomes in the variety of questions raised. We're not even really wasting money with badly located holes we're just placing in jigsaw pieces into a largely bank board.

I really appreciate what you say about Tropicana. A decade ago no-one understood it at all.
Would I be wrong in saying Nova and maybe even the WMP being re-looked at (drilled) came out of re- kindled interest in the area?

Personally I'm glad they shelved looking for Mississippi style Zn.

Thanks again for the thoughts. I'll look at it more in due course.