Bumping this back to the top in light of the anticipation I have in the Micon reports that are pending. Now folks do you think we drilled up those 40-60 anomalies since Oct 07?

************************************...

I like the "tip of the iceberg" theories.

"This valuation does not attempt to compare the Company with other exploration projects nearby including Golden Chalice,Liberty Mines, First Nickel, and Starfire Minerals. The area appears to have large structures that extend across claims. The entirearea may become a target for development by a multi-national mining company, which suggests that a higher in-situ Ni valuationis warranted. If the Company doubles this reports estimate of Ni at Langmuir through detailed drilling, then it is likely to become a target.

The methodology applied to estimating Ni at Langmuir 1 did not attempt to “fill-in” gaps in core sample data, where the summarized report excluded a length between reported samples. It is the opinion of the writer that the effect would be that Ni estimated at Langmuir 1 is low.

From the Jensen report (p.48): “Detailed mapping and interpretation indicates that both the Langmuir No.1 and No.2 deposits occur at the same stratigraphic position on opposite limbs of an anticline / syncline pair and implies that the favourable stratigraphy may be repeated at several locations on the property.” In the author’s opinion, this should be interpreted as meaning that the above Ni poundage estimates are a starting point, and that significantly more Ni is highly likely to be found at the Company’s Langmuir area properties after they drill into the 40-60 anomalies they are targeting over the next year."