Welcome To the WIN!!! St. Elias Mines HUB On AGORACOM

Keep in mind, the opinions on this site are for the most part speculation and are not necessarily the opinions of the company WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Free
Message: Re: 0.15 cut off grade GEER 1
4
Mar 15, 2011 07:02PM
1
Mar 15, 2011 09:03PM
3
Mar 15, 2011 09:40PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 12:09AM
2
Mar 16, 2011 01:43AM
2
Mar 16, 2011 07:38AM
2
Mar 16, 2011 08:36AM
3
Mar 16, 2011 09:24AM
1
Mar 16, 2011 12:20PM
4
Mar 16, 2011 01:14PM

1) I dont know why you are pursuing the 0.15 g/t thing. Its uneconomical and doesn,t apply to SLI at the moment, unless you want to calculate how much gold is blowing around up there in the dust. I am not pursuing this subject any further.

2) My dear man, your image is not the best one to use. This one is a little better for you to get measurements off. Hog or some one else could post the 4000 line , that shows an extension of the Giant anomaly lying just about 80m beneath the surface.

http://agoracom.com/ir/steliasmines/photos

I strongly suggest you take the required time to go over the technical report and look at each 2-D image. Count up ALL the near surface anomalies that are not even PART of the giant anomaly and its child to the South East, hint ( I think there is around 2 dozen or so).

Also GEER, keep in mind that the millirads used in defining the anomaly are ONLY the highest readings (off the chart readings), the second and third highest readings could not be used because the signatures were too strong and would distort the shape of the Giant. We dont want that, because the drill is going to try and target the highest grade of the anomaly. The colors that were lighting up the measly 5oz/t stuff out of the C complex and the little better 16-19 oz globs out of the A-4, were also eliminated. You can see this by comparing the 2-D slides with the Giant anomaly image.

This statement of yours;

100 mil ounces in the first 150 meters??? Buddy why do you have to discredit yourself with statements like this? That would be an average grade of 2.6 g/t over the entire main rectangle(2000X4000)...

Glad you are dreaming of 1 nugget found on the property...

The main rectangle is 2.5km x 7km, here is a map you can get some measurements off, but you should go by the recent one sent with the Giant anomaly image, because it shows our property as bigger yet( its more up to date).

http://agoracom.com/ir/steliasmines/photos

Now, I am gonna give you some numbers to play with, and I warn you, don,t come back on here with fictitious low numbers, because BOW likes math, and he will catch you if you manipulate them. Anyways, here are some;

There are 4 gold bearing veins , at least ,in the C complex, C-1 to 4. They are within 100m of each other, running parrallel with the exception of one. The grades have been between 2-5.84 ozs/t. Grades get better with depth. We have samples down to 100m.

In the A-4 region, there are 8 known gold bearing veins to date, we only patially mined the #4 vein, WITH MULTIPLE NUGGETS, tAKE A LOOK;

http://agoracom.com/ir/steliasmines/photos

The info for the stope grades is in the NR,s and not shown here, but you will find one sample of 681 g/t in the nr of apr 17/07.

The N-1 vein, (just found!) is about 1 km to the NE of the C-1 region, the one and only sample taken from this was 2.5ozs gold.

Please, GEER, keep in mind that we are mostly talking OUNCES not GRAMS when talking about the Tesoro.

Check out all the surface samples, wide spread and the grades, do some quick math on those.

Also take note; we just increased our land pkg there by over 240% and haven,t even explored that yet.

And oh yeah, do the math on the T-14 anomaly beside the C-1 region that hasn,t been touched yet, I will help you, at 1 g/t it can contain 9.2 million ounces of gold, I beleive that is what BOW,S calc,s came to..

1
Mar 16, 2011 01:38PM
2
Mar 16, 2011 01:38PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 01:45PM
2
Mar 16, 2011 01:47PM
1
Mar 16, 2011 01:48PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 01:50PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 06:01PM
2
Mar 16, 2011 10:15PM
1
Mar 16, 2011 10:20PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 10:51PM
2
Mar 16, 2011 11:37PM
3
Mar 16, 2011 11:55PM
2
Mar 17, 2011 12:09AM
2
Mar 17, 2011 12:18AM
3
lb7
Mar 17, 2011 12:29AM
3
Mar 17, 2011 12:33AM
3
Mar 17, 2011 01:00AM
2
Mar 17, 2011 01:01AM
3
Mar 17, 2011 08:25AM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply