Nth West Gossan area (inc. Tepes and all targets), page-11

No sorry, Russia. I don't know the format of the lat/long, it's not in a format I'm familiar with and when I convert it to decimal e.g. 73.1944 it just goes to crazy places. I remember now that I tried this about a year ago then went MEH. That lead me to doing this sort of stuff (overlaying the imagery) to just get a sense of how far these holes are apart, what they focus on, and so on.

Combined here the TMI vs RTP (hard to blend that one) / the TMI with the IP / 2011 aerial photo with the TMI



The crux of my post I guess, is that hole 88 in 2015 reported that the pyrrhotite explained the magnetic anomaly, including an off hole DHEM anomaly. My point is that the literature seems to agree that pyrrhotite and magnetite can often form sheets around further sulphides (like in the picture I posted). Along with this, my point about the RTP vs TMI imaging, which one is more accurate, and which direction was the off hole anomaly because if it was north, perhaps they should have drilled centre on the TMI target not RTP.

The other focus of my post is like, what's the difference between the peperitic textures vs spinifex textured rock, if both of them indicate underwater lava flows, why report on peperitic like its a big deal? eg.. hole 89 in 2015.

THX didn't really explain very well in the 2015 Anns what the results of the holes 88 / 89 meant, we only got one paragraph to work on whereas the geo on site would have seen a lot more that lead to the decision of the holes not warranting further follow up. Obviously they like the area, which is why they're drilling at Tepes, but it would be nice to see in the Anns a section on NWGossan area with a bit more explanation of the results I think.

Just trying to make sense of things in my mind thats all, and its hard for an everyday bloke who's not a geo.