I took the below from the 2005 tech report. We had plotted samples from this report that matched up to the appropriate Google Earth images, but not the actual positions. So, IMO, the drill collars would have been selected by GPS, therefore, they should be correct. So, the problem is just in the Google Earth posittioning, and shouldn,t affect where we drilled in relation to the anomalies, IMO.

"Sample sites were recorded using GPS (geographical positioning system) units
calibrated to UTM datum South America 1956. Because the property is flat and
open, seven satellites could typically be acquired by the GPS units; therefore the
accuracy of locations is considered excellent."