There is the primary MLEM conductor from surface and the DHEM...

There is the primary MLEM conductor from surface and the DHEM off-hole conductor. If they missed the primary conductor by deviation of drill or couldn't explain it by intersect at the target interval, strong probability says they would have said so with the results announced of the hole. But they didn't.

So (IMO) when they did DHEM and it passed through the disseminated pyrhhotite and graphite that gave rise to the MLEM primary surface conductor, they got a weak response. However if there is connectivity to more of this conductive rock down-dip it can give a nice secondary EM response off-hole. Now that Oz has pointed to the evidence that we don't necessarily have a conflict of dip direction between the primary surface and off-hole conductor - then (IMO) that theory holds weight. So if you can appreciate that paragraph and also that geophysics is a dark art, then you can reread the news of yesterday and perhaps see it is compatible with the alternative theory that I propose. Or you just say it sounds like a load of BS and they missed the conductor.......

P.S. The MLEM (moving loop) may have been FLEM (fixed loop)- I have wiped this play from my memory bank. Either way it doesn't alter my argument.