Designz ... I am not sure I follow you with the PDF file that was given out ... I was given a data disc with the powerpoint dated September 2007.
Yes ... there is some duplication from the previous powerpoint but there are new pieces added other than Chiroco such as a new geophysics image ... a new property outline ... the 9ct rock ... etc.
I want to run something by this 'serious 'board as per the Agoracom 'mantra'.
I was the person who first noticed the labels on the photos that disappeared from the Sola gallery some time ago. 24 hours after I brought this to the attention of the Stockhouse board ... the labels and photos were removed. Upon inquiry to the company ... I was informed it was simply a mistake. The labels that vanished were 'Almir' and 'Chiroca'. The new powerpoint now reveals the 'Chiroco' placer deposit. I suppose the mistake the company referred to was the spelling of the name but this would not explain the removal of the photos at that time. More than likely .. the reason for pulling the photos had more to do with ongoing land aquisition whereby the Chiroco deal wasn't complete at the time. The company felt it prudent to remove the material altogether until such a time the loose ends were tightened up. ( My opinion)
At this point in time this is neither here or there ... it has been discussed and so we move on. The company has been making it very clear that they can only disclose information that can be proven factual so while they can discuss historical reference they cannot claim it as fact. We are left to make our own interpretations of the relevance of historical/atisanal reporting.
I now want to present this group with something I have brought up on the Stockhouse forum and the only thing I would ask is you keep in mind the above statements regarding the whole Chiroca - Chiroco deal when formulating a response.
The 2005 Bruce Evans tech report has a property outline which shows a marker for the Carolina kimberlite. It is a yellow star with a shadow underneath it. Not a second kimberlite pipe marker ... simply an offset shadow.
Bruce Evans had used the Oct 2003 WGM tech report commisioned by Santa Elina. In this report there are a couple of property outlines showing not only the location of their pipes but also pipes off property including Carolina. WGM sampled Carolina. At the time of the WGM report they had shown 17 kimberlites/pipes that existed on the property . The three off of property were Melgaco, Carolina and Arara1. You will notice that there is a single star marking each pipe location.
Moving on ... we take a look at the Vaaldiam's latest property outline showing the newest discoveries on the property. This can be found on their website under Pimenta Bueno. You will notice red stars marking the new discoveries. You will see green circles marking kimberlites/pipes. Take a close look at the Carolina kimberlite ... there are two overlapping circles there with a yellow diamond beside them to the East. The yellow diamond marks alluvials. The two green markers are a little difficult to make out but they are evident. The important thing to note is the fact there are two kimberlite markers not a single marker with a shadow.
Now ... if you have the new powerpoint ... you will see our newest property schematic. This outline takes the fuzzy Vaaldiam green markers and shows two very clear and distinctly different yellow stars with the Northern most marker being labeled the Carolina. There is no alluvial marker in this image but we know we have an associated alluvial deposit and we know where it is located in relation to the Carolina pipe.
Taking into account the latest property outlines by Vaaldiam and Sola you can see a very different picture emerging in front of you that wasn't evident in the earlier tech reports mentioned.
Notice that the number of kimberlite/pipe markers have increased in line with the discoveries by Vaaldiam (now 41) and curiously so has Sola's discovery markers.
In both companies latest definition we can see that the alluvial marker and the two kimberlite/pipe markers on the Almir block ( one being the Carolina) are in line with what we know to be the locations of each. The garimpeoros first discovered the alluvials and worked their way East to the Carolina pipe. We know that the Carolina anomalies and fault pattern runs in a North West- South East direction. We can clearly see the markers supporting the geophysics and faulting within the immediate area.
We know from the new geophysics that there is a highlighted dipole signature which states a possible kimberlite trace and is in association with an anomaly at least twice the size of Carolina. We know from the companies latest news release and presentations that there is a dyke extension to the Carolina which is on strike to the large anomaly to the South East of Carolina.
Both the Vaaldiam and Sola latest property images and pipe marked locations are from the current year and both show two kimberlite markers at the Carolina location.
My question to you is ... what is the significance of this change in markers in 2007 for both companies?
How long have they known? OK ... I ask this because the Sola November 2006 powerpoint has the clearest marking of two kimberlites/pipes at the Carolina location ... Vaaldiam released their image in February 2007 ... they obviously referenced Sola's image for the Carolina markers ... so tell me ... how long has Sola known and how long has Heavymoney suspected this to be the case?
Do you think the second marker is for the dyke extension or the large pipe (?) to the South East of which Sola took extra effort in highlighting the associated dipole signature to that large anomaly?
Knowing that that second large anomaly is only 400 mtrs to the South East of the Carolina ... does the tight overlap of the two markers send a clear message as to the significance of not only this marker but also the highlighting of the dipole signature with the label suggesting a possible kimberlite trace?
Has Sola given us a clear indication of reality?
Keep in mind the Chiroca/Chiroco situation ... I knew all along that there was a vary large significance to those photos when they were removed ... I also know something about these current markers?
Think ... give me your response .. I will enjoy reading serious posts and not the ... well ... I'm sure you know what I mean.
If your response is the second marker continues to be a shadow ... go back and look at the Bruce Evans report and notice every pipe marker has shadow ... not so in the two current outlines or in November 2006.
