I dont know if 'detail' is the issue as much as accuracy is, from the way I'm interpreting these results at least. Yes they have over 1000m of sections, but they only chose to provide visuals for something like 50m of pegmatite intersection, a fraction. Yet almost none of the correlating information for even that relatively small 50m matches or has been presented accurately.
One other thing that stood out was NRRC083/84.
They've logged over 200m of pegmatite in each hole yet they only chose to show the visuals for 4m and 12m out of that, is it just hundreds of metres of dark coloured rocks?
Same thing with this statement
"The maximum interval being 187m in hole NRRC080 logged as pegmatite in diorite and granite." There is no visuals provided for any of this hole. My main concern then is how much of these hundreds of metres of logged pegmatites are actually worth reporting on then?
I'm personally not seeing how these results could lead to something significant but I guess the sheer scale of the pegmatites could point to potential for results in the future.
