Ok i have a minute. I read your 'fresh question' and asked myself..did santa read my post? I think you did santa. I did not suggest the anomolies were not drilled but then you know that. Youre deflection shows your desperation but thats another topic for another time. I clearly suggested we dont know 'to what extent' they were drilled without the noted information i discussed. I dont know if the edges of the anomolies were just skimmed or what. So yes this information could very well change my interpretation of the reported results. Like i pointed out. There isnt enough info. I also did not suggest management lied and i find it interesting you suggest i feel a huge discovery was hidden lol and you use your own imagination as an excuse for me not believing the angles because of a fabricated opinion that i feel they lied about drilling the anomolies lmao. I believe they drilled the anomolies. Lol but not in the way you would suggest. I feel this way because of all the excuses for the lack of pertinant information that, like i said before, would probably raise more questions then answers are given for. I also believe your description of material information being subjective may come in to play as well as your description of rules being bent not broken.