Ann: Positive Results returned for Noombenberry Project, page-9

Well, I have absolutely no idea where nakamoto gets his info from, but it's irrelevant; if minerals that are found in fresh rock are being found to 60% by volume at surface, then going to 10m+ will only make the rock more fresh. So, even though this aphorism might be true (it probably isn't), it is irrelevant.

If LRS follows nakamotos advice, in all probability they will just find fresher material with less kaolin and less halloysite. Since halloysite is a clay mineral formed by weathering, one would want to find rock which is completely weathered.

For example, ADN's rock contains 5% or less feldspars and micas. Likewise for RMX's kaolin, and all the other wheatbelt kaolin hopefuls; their mica and feldspar contents are in the <10% range. Quartz is not so much of an issue, as it tends to remain as large, solid crystals and is screened out during processing. Some of the kaolin deposits contain 15-25% quartz, which is screened out. So that's not much of an issue.

But having 30% feldspars and 30% quartz, classifies this as saprock, not saprolite. So, however exceptional the halloysite is, LRS has done little more than confirm the MINEDEX report which spurred the vendor to peg the tenement a few months before flipping it in here. Which is great. But it's, in my opinion, miles away from being interesting economically, and the results thus far should temper expectations for a quick ten bagger, IMO (and DYOR, etc etc).

Also, one should bear in mind that the number of kaolin occurrences in WA is around 70, and very few of these have been subjected to scanning electron microscopy or quantitative x-ray diffraction to quantify whether the kaolin is halloysite, or actual kaolin. So claiming 15% halloysite at 3m is exceptional is rather a brave declaration when there's such little knowledge of the mineralogy of kaolin deposits, or even just white saprolite materials throughout the wheatbelt.