RE: Visuals9 Oct 2025 20:12
Nashwan123 @20:02, Thur, 9 Oct 2025. Since you asked me by name @news, I will give you the courtesy of a reply. In Great Britain, in law, if someone makes a statement, they are given the right of reply and this follows the rule of law. So, in my conversation with an Australian Geologist on a open, public forum, the cores of Red Setter @WSBN were discussed. He gave his view of the visuals and he also stated the same thing to another enquirer. I then posted a reply and he did not reply further which means in in the above rule, there is NO further discussion as my view was taken into account. It is on evidenced on an Australian forum. What I stated is what DL also stated and it is a general principle of unless anyone stating they are Geo's [one doesnt know what sort of Geo eg Economist Geo, Geophysicists, Exploration Geo with experience in Australia or Africa which has different geology etc]. My reply follows convention that ONLY if a Geo examines the cores in person like Sprott's external Geo, looks at ALL THE CORES , not just part of a small section of A core, examines with specialist glass viewer, sees them cut and assayed or XRF internally as well, then it is not enough evidence looking at not high resolution pictures and this is the rule. Hence, many Geo's dont want the risk due to that convention isnt it? That is up to you to ask and if you know enough from many drills of different co's, then you can have the last reply - if no further reply, then what I said is from CONVENTION as above isnt it?