The Illusion of Precision in Mineral Resource Estimation One of the biggest misconceptions in mineral resource estimation is believing that more decimal places mean greater accuracy. A block model may report grades such as 1.234 g/t or 1.237 g/t, but those numbers should never be interpreted as absolute truth. They are the result of geological interpretation, sampling quality, estimation methods, and statistical assumptions—not direct measurements of reality. Every resource estimate carries uncertainty, regardless of how sophisticated the software or workflow may be. Understanding the difference between precision and accuracy is essential for every geologist and mining professional. True confidence in a resource estimate comes from : 1. Robust geological interpretation 2. High-quality sampling and QA/QC 3. Appropriate domaining and estimation strategy 4. Comprehensive validation 5. Transparent communication of uncertainty As geologists, our responsibility is not to create models that appear perfect, but to build models that are geologically defensible, statistically sound, and fit for decision-making. A resource model is a decision-support tool—not a perfect representation of reality. I'm curious to hear your perspective: In your experience, what contributes more to misleading resource estimates: poor geological interpretation or misplaced confidence in software outputs? #Mining #Geology #MineralResources #ResourceEstimation #Geostatistics #MiningEngineering #CompetentPerson #GeologicalModeling #MiningIndustry #EarthScience #ZveniaMining