General discussion (MEI), page-2622

This is kinda miy point in prior posts. Less talk of good, bad, amazing, diasater... and just that there's a lot still to be done / demonstrated through drilling, testing and met work.

Not sure I'd agree with the silica underaturation being the reason it is called ionic as a lot of the there are a lot of nepheline-syneite complexes with no residual ionic clays and a lot of ionic clays spatially de-coupled from their source complex. You might well be right partially but I think source rock, besides increased REE budget, is only one factor in whether/where an IAC deposit may form.

On that note, I've seen a few maps of the Pocos de Caldas area (not from MEI) and they vary a bit, most have a syenite/peralkaline compex in the central NW but several have these rocks all over the place as wellas hydrothermally altered "rock" all about the place. So the potential for IAC in the greater caldera seems "unclear" (given the chemistry, I suspect the petrologists have crawled all over the thing but a lot is under cover...). and secondly, within the confines of the caldera/alkaline volcanic complex, there's no reason why IAC distribution needs to be strictly residual, I've not seen confirmation that the weathering profile is strictly in situ, and not moved around a bit (again, within the caldera at the 100s m, to Km scale, not wafting in from miles away...). Not claiming it isn't, just haven't seen it.welcome comments for those who've dug a bit deeper...