spiny: " Seriously, I think 25 times background is not exceptional."

Where do you get this information from ? Can you give references for your statement?

My understanding is that other companies consider radioactivity levels as:

- "significant" @ 2.5 to 4 times background

- "high" @ 4 to 5 times background

- "very high" @ 6 times background or greater

They would consider further examination (diamond drilling) at 3 times background or greater !

http://www.ags.gov.ab.ca/publication... (p.13)

http://www.mrt.tas.gov.au/mrtdoc/dom...

(p.4: 30x background = considerable concentration)

http://www.retailstar.net.au/reports...

(p.3 , "significant anomaly" with "typical" 2x background, "often" 6-8x background and "maximum" reading nearly 10x background)

These are just a few samples of my DD which clearly indicate that 25x background certainly doesn´t seem to be "too bad" !

And coming to scintillometer readings:

> 1100 cps certainly is something "unusual" when > 9999 cps is off-scale

I would suggest that anybody interested in scintillometer results should scan the results of the "best discovery in the last 30 years" in order to find a lot of readings < 500 cps , the majority between 500 and 2000 cps and some up to 9999 cps or off-scale !

http://www.hathor.ca/i/pdf/midwest/2...

We will see what the concentrations (in%) will be when they are released, but this doesn´t seem to be as bad as some here want us to believe !

So I hold my breath !

FANTOMAS