RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:Hopefully that huge ask is an arranged cross.Palfryville ... I was critical of Clark for using the XRF previously because it was a historic validation exercise and could be construed as "cherry picking" the best looking spot of core to hit with the XRF. Everybody already knew what to expect and it wasn't going to be 150 mtrs of 6% copper because historic work does not support hitting that kind of number within the established historic resource.
I fully support using XRF on the current exploratory hole drilled into ... what is described as a "magnitude higher" anomaly compared to the response at the historic site. XRF in this case would quickly let the market know there is mineralization in that zone and if the XRF is used on multiple areas of the core (not necessarily cherry picked for highest numbers) the market would wake up and start to envision a blue sky scenario as actually being possible.
Assays are always the best data but for the narrow reason I suggest ... XRF should definitely be used right f'ck'n now ... lol.