That’s a lot of targets that a long, long, long time... Looking at the recent track record a lot of possible discoveries, how big a find could this be?

About 5 years ago I read and article in the Atlantic monthly on gold deposits and specifically the Witwatersrand Gold Deposit (found in 1886). Scientists and geologists had debated for years on the origin of the deposit, called a conglomerate deposit, weather it was unique, placer or hydrothermal in nature. This is different than a placer (like in a riverbed) or a hydrothermal (like San Gold).

Now we all now of the enormity of the South African find which has produced much of the worlds gold. The researchers claimed that they had resolved the source of the gold. That the formation was from a placer deposit of fine grained gold particles in a layer combined with gravel, stones and sand, then cemented into a sedimentary formation, and faulted and folded. They were able to chemically identify that the gold originated from a single greenstone belt 100 miles to the northwest. The gold had eroded over hundreds of millions of years. This greenstone belt is 1 billion years older than Rice Lake's Greenstone Belt.

If anything it shows the possibility of what a greenstone belt may hold. In Red Lake they have found 20M oz gold, in Timmins they have found 70M oz gold, and many other belts they have found 10's of millions of ounces of gold. To my knowledge NONE have found a repeating geological model that works, maybe it just wasn’t sliced right, until... maybe now.

40 years is a long, long long time... How big could this deposit be?

I don't know... but I’m sticking around.