Thanks for putting this together Talentless, I am going to...

Thanks for putting this together Talentless, I am going to assume its been rushed over as a quick read brings a number of errors to surface and sheds some light on your negative stance and perhaps that of the broader market if they are listing to those who claim to be most qualified. Lets not underestimate the importance of accurate and complete information on a forum like this from those who claim to be qualified/specialists in field.

You state -
"The second image is a cross section through phase 1 with the best reults of 1m @ 4.2g/t from 93m in SDRC013 "

SDRC013 had .64g/t average grading over 8 meters and and the 1m section you mention, how is this even close to the best results from phase 1?

I really am starting to wonder about the data people are using to make there investment choices/analysis, perhaps it is time I speak with Peter S to see if we can address some of the key information many are looking for as I don't see any other way unless another geologist who understands these deposits can step forward with a professional and data accurate perspective.

You appear to include the holes with weakest least relevant results but exclude the actual strong ones Talentless, strange indeed. This presentation is also not what I was expecting from a geologist but I will go into that In a more in depth look at this post another time or perhaps I will focus on getting us what we need.

I think focusing on producing the information we need would be a better use of my time.

Just to correct a few things in relation to Phase 1 (or I have completely misunderstood what you are trying to say) -

Our best results from Phase One were (first 20 holes)

SIGNIFICANT DRILLING RESULTS – 5m @ 3.8g/t Au from 9m incl. 1m @ 15.6g/t Au from 10m (SDRC006) – 2m @ 4.2g/t Au from 92m to EOH (SDRC017) – 16m @ 1.3g/t Au from 8m incl. 7m at 2.1 from 11m (SDRC020)

Why were SDR006 and SDRC020 missed completely and SDR017 (by far the weaker of the three) appears somewhat downplayed in your representation with the strongest not being mentioned?

On just this quick look what has been produced in the above post it appears to be a long way off being able to assist me with my analysis and appears rather misleading based on how data has been presented unless I have misread/misunderstood the data presented by Talentless .

I admit to being strongly bias on this one so I am open to fresh eyes on the data we have to hand. I don't have time over the coming weeks to work on this in the detail to add value here but If I have an opportunity to catch up with geologist friends I have I will try to get us some fresh perspectives.

Apologies to Talentless if I have somehow misread his post, its late and I should be in bed, I only skimmed over it so hopefully the error is in my interpretation of the post and wake to a new outlook on a proper read.

But given the length to which some have gone to down play our position to date if my initial judgement is correct I am certainly now more clear on how our share price got to where it is currently.

With a $4million market cap here I am seriously considering adding once again to holdings, the crushed share price we see today may just be down to manipulation after all (manipulation can come in many forms and may just be a result of ongoing sophisticated daytrading systems rather than long term advanced accumulation strategies however it may be both or neither, but given some of the action we have witnessed games have certainly been played on this stock.

I have also captured various screen shots of this taking place through propping and capping and sophisticated order techniques that most would miss. I may post a few up if people are interested and if I can find enough on this pc to make it relevant, have a bunch on a pc interstate from the early days.

I cant answer how much impact these have had but given where we are now I certainly don't consider they have helped, one claimed it was a pump and dump. How can the person claiming it to be a pump and dump also claim that those pointing out obvious manipulation events are desperate, i did not suddenly start pointing them out now, I have been pointing them out all along. Just because our price is where it is certainly does not mean manipulation is not present or has been a factor.

Manipulation is very present in the speculative stock market, don't let people convince you it is not present as this is certainly a show of inexperience and lack of knowledge about how these markets operate.

Is pumping and dump not manipulation and if they were able to swing it like that in the early days why not now with similar intent? I often see stocks like this cycled in this manner, its just a pity it appears to be happening on a stock with so much potential but I guess the potential is well known by those involved and may make it a target for this sort of behavior in early days.

Another aspect of manipulation can come from organised groups of forum posters but given the above I will leave that up to the public to ponder on.