You guys have completely lost all common sense. Blooms analysis of bench 3950 highlights the fatal flaw with PG's methods and explains why the final estimate will not even be close to 10M. There is absolutely no logic for the grades and tonnages presented. If you don't believe me, do a quick and dirty estimate yourself, PG was kind enough to include the entire dataset in the report for you. I think you'll find if you treat the -1 samples as waste rather than simply ignore them the resource for the entire deposit drops down to somewhere in the neighborhood of 2M. Problem is that still doesn't account for the "reverse compositing" that PG appears to have done....which could drop it even further. That's my opinion based on my calculations from PG's data...and I'm quite comfortable with it.
The information is there, it's not rocket science. So rather than just hurl insults at the people you've labelled as "bashers" just because they happen to know something about resource estimates, provide some constructive evidence as to why you think they're wrong. Otherwise you just look desperate.