Re: A Geological Case for a "Meteor Impact" Theory - Fanciful thoughts
posted on
Dec 21, 2007 07:50AM
NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)
He said:
This is the sort of academic mumbo jumbo which confuses the masses and basically is wrong. John, you use all the right words unfortunately you're way off base and making comparisons which aren't worth making.
Question: Because there are meteorite impact sites on the moon are there many nickel deposits there as well?
The evidence for a meteorite impact site being located in Sudbury has been there for 1.8 billion years. It just took a while for people to understand the significance of that evidence after man landed on the moon and studied definite impact sites up close.
There is no evidence of a meteorite impact site in McFauld's Lake. What's more worrisome to me is that your diatribe convinces some people that you might know what you're talking about. Phone up an Inco geologist and ask them if what they've seen at McFaulds is anything like what they see in Sudbury. The answer is no.
I respond:
And you have a degree in??? If there ever was a bash on this stock it would be your post!! John has been respect long before you came along. Obviously you have been sent by the same people that are manipulating this stock and keeping it low!!! Have you noticed how all the staking is taking the shape of a crater....coincidence!!! I really do not like people you play on fear and wish to prevent people from making educated descisions.
Go NOT Go!
Glorieux