Well there he goes again, not discussing the topic at hand, but instead trying to demean other posters and question their motivations.
In the JORC compliance table (section 2) of the lastest exploration update they state
“
The geological setting of the area reported in this announcement is that of hydrothermally altered mafic intrusive within Proterozoic volcanic and volcanoclastic rocks. The precise nature of this unusual style of igneous rock-hosted precious metal mineralisation is currently unknown.”
Here is a suggestion to the company.
In the Physics building at the University of Western Australia there is a machine called a JEOL 8530F microprobe.
http://www.cmca.uwa.edu.au/facilities/sem/joel-6400r-microprobe2
The machine is heavily booked at the momemt but if you get in contact with Dr Malcom Roberts you can book time on this machine.
The machine is capable of building a raster image of any polished rock surface you put under it at a resolution of 1 micron. ie it will tell you precisely the mineral composition of the rock and any metals contained in that rock (to 10ppm) as it builds a 2 dimensional image of the rock surface on 1micron bands.
Here is how it is described
“The microprobe is equipped with five wavelength-dispersive (WD) crystal spectrometers, one JEOL silicon-drift energy-dispersive spectrometer (SDD), and an optical microscope for focusing. It has a PCD for measuring beam current. LDE1, LDE2 and TAP(2) crystals are available for light-element (low-energy) analysis, while PET(4) and LIF(4) crystals, in conjunction with the TAP crystals, cover the heavier elements (O-U). An xCLent hyperspectral cathodoluminescence system has also been fitted to the instrument.
The microprobe is capable of fully standardised, quantitative major, minor and trace element (10 ppm) analysis of flat polished samples. It is also capable of generating element distribution maps and line profiles, as well as hyperspectral cathodoluminescence maps.”
Maybe if BBX prepared some samples and booked some time on this machine or another one just like it, they could get some answers about their so called unknown style of precious mineral mineralisation.
Assuming that the extraction technique is producing minimum grades is a very dangerous game IMO. You must be able to determine the error bars (ie limits of accurancy) in any scientific experiment or else it is simply flawed. That is the basis of all experimental science. What are the error bars on the recovery grades being published in announcements by BBX?
All commercial assay labs will give you limits of accuracy with any measurement they make.
BBX states in this annoucement that
“The standard quality control procedures for routine assays of 25 to 50 grams are not applicable to 5kg bulk metallurgical tests. As these are initial metallurgical tests utilising a method still under development there is no statistical basis on which to establish an acceptable level of accuracy and precision. No commercial certified standards are available for this type of material where the nature of the mineralisation has yet to be established. The results obtained by extracting physical gold and silver from bulk samples give an indicative value of how much metal may be extracted using BBX’s current extraction process technology, which remains under development. No external laboratory checks have been conducted as the methodology, which is regarded as proprietary has yet to be finalised.”
Read the above. It says an “indicative” value. There are no error bounds on these measurements.
The company also says
“The results in this announcement are for indicative metallurgical testwork and do not purport to be in any way representative of an entire geological unit or body. This work is being conducted as a precursor to commencing small-scale trial mining and pilot-scale treatment.”
So people who claim to be able to calculate resources on this information are being totally misleading, as for starters the grades are not known with any abslotute certainty, as there are no error bars (limits of accuracy quoted against the grade estimates) and the company says the metallurgical test work does not purport to being in any way represenatitive of an entire geological unit.
People who are saying “we” have 7 million ozs of resources on a statically valid basis are just misleading investors, pure and simple.Esh
