Food for thought people.

G'day fellow prospectors.

Here's something to consider/think about. With every new bit of detecting technology introduced throughout the years, (coil, detector/timing  combinations) we gain say 5 to 10% or more, better depth response over buried targets, yet I'v heard on more than one occasion here "well the gold has to be there in the first place in order for one to find it). Interesting theory. Now I ask you, where's the first place we all run to the moment we get our hands on a new detector or coil? Is it not straight back to an area that has produced gold for us in the past, but deemed "flogged out?" or does one go looking for virgin gold bearing country or ground?
The answer is simple, we go straight back to flogged ground (ground that has been kind to us in the past) in search of any more of that elusive slug of gold & almost always, find something in way of colour with the newer technology. So how can anyone say, the gold has got to be there in the first place in order for us to find it, when in fact, the newer detecting technology is constantly proving us wrong, by going a little deeper & picking up, what couldn't be picked up before, in/over ground deemed flogged to death, no matter what we tried?      Hence, I can only conclude, there is still more gold to be found in/over areas deemed flogged by every detector/coil combo under the sun no?  Just some food for thought people.

Cheers Kon.  

Agree 100% Kon.

It's about the only real way that we can tell if the new whiz bang machine is doing something better / deeper ! And invariably they do !

Testing over a test patch only tells part of the story, finding more gold in already heavily gridded / flogged ground is the true test !

Rick