magnetic-survey results soon?, page-48

"It's NO EXT, but i'm on board for another great ride!" SHAQ

A very sensible comment Shaq ...after all , Husab size , and quality , deposits don't turn up every day .
However , If we all understand that this is a highly speculative stock , and that we are "wagering" our investment the "chance " of making a major new discovery on the basis of a high risk/ high reward ratio , who can complain if M72 turns out to be a dud ??
I'm sorry , but if punters are invested in MLS thinking it is a "Blue Chip" investment they must have access to the internet at their resident psychiatric facility .

Having said that , I also agree with you that your judgement re a new upward leg is also well based .
I don't know your logic , but mine is based on the gelogical evidence that is on the table .
M72 has delivered some geological evidence that undeniably points towards the existence of mineralised uranium in the M72 sb-surface structure(s).ULTIMATELY THAT MAY PROVE NOT TO BE THE CASE ......but no-one can deny the evidence trail , to this point .
The ill-fated pursuit of a Langer Heinrich model of mineralisation, in the face of geological evidence of HUSAB/Rossing style of mineralisation was a mistake imo .
So far at M72 we have evidence of :
major radiometric anomalies.
outcropping highly mineralised sub-structure rock .
shallow calcrete
extensive mineralised zones in shallow trenching.
RadonX evidence of gases released from the sub surface through the decay of uranium .
regional scale evidence of a sub-structure (magnetic low(s))usually associated with sub surface U mineralised deposits eg Husab .
STILL TO GO :
1 HD scale evidence of structures ( magnetic low(s) suitable to host U mineralisation and targets for drilling .
2 High grade mineralisation , over extensive intersections ,produce via a deep drilling program .
What price if we get a major tick on 1 ,above , and are about to drill ?
I am not a geologist .
DYOR

GLTA
regards
Q