Worrisome trend with voodoo-geophysical techniques

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Dear all, 

Not long ago, someone was stating publicly that he was able to calculate the GDP of countries with just country-wide regional airborne geophysical data. That sounded like a magic sword was being used to make such calculations. 

These “voodoo-geophysical techniques” (term taken from Greg Hodges) seem to find more and more space (and acceptance?) in the public domain. Read please below. I am afraid it will not take long until a major fraud happens. 

What can the scientific and professional community do to avoid these misleading offers to clients? Would it make sense to have am international registry, such as 

https://www.pgo.ca ?

Regards, 

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Nzikou, Michel]

This is scary and true we are not longer to see the scandal happen. Thanks for sharing.

Michel Nzikou, Ph.D.

-----

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

[Greg Hodges]

Well, Sergio, there's a lot of free-enterprise people in our industry who would not want an international registry or restrictions, for many reasons.  Caveat Emptor.

Many of the registries, like the PGO and APEGGA, are pretty toothless.  They've been given authority to regulate people and corporations who call themselves "Geoscientists" (or similar), but too many Voodoo sellers have dodged the regulators by claiming that what they do is not really geophysics.  (I suppose they're not too far wrong on that claim.)     We had some recent suggestions, in this medium, that the geoscience regulators should be more like the medical regulators - supposedly able to shut down phonies.  But we in Canada have seen a situation recently, in Saskatchewan, where a pseudo-medical clinic was promising ALS "cures" to the U.S. public, but keeping the provincial regulators away by telling them they were NOT a medical clinic.

Greg Hodges

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

It is a shame how some misuse and abuse our profession and try to cheat and mislead. 

I am aware of some in our profession offering to African governments the calculation of mineral reserves from just country-wide regional airborne geophysical data, so that countries can offer government bonds in international financial markets.

An international professional regulation is urgently needed. Perhaps Canadian, Australian, European, and South African agencies issuing P.Geo, AusIMM, EurGeol, and PrNatSc designations can get together?

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Henry Lyatsky]

Caveat emptor.  Period.

There's too much regulation at the provincial level as it is.  I am paying $525 a year for a membership that has no value to me at all.

The last thing we need is a globo-bureaucracy not accountable to any voters at all.

My ego does not require validation through titles.  I will not accept any scheme to bully folks.  Socialists and corporatists who want to grow an arbitrary government without democratic oversight deserve nothing but implacable opposition.  NO, NO, NO!

Democracy and freedom begin at the grass-roots, and they are worth defending.

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

So, do you agree that geophysical vendors are allowed to cheat and mislead clients with full impunity? without any consequences?

It will not take long until the next Bre-X happen, this time it will be in the form of a Bre-Xcal.culation

A regulation has nothing to do with democracy.  Would you say that having to own a driver’s license to be allowed to drive a motor vehicle is antidemocratic?

Not long ago, I was aware of a geophysical provider delivering “radiometric data” in areas where the aircraft with the crystals flew well above 350m ground clearance. 

Confusing clients with technical jargon that the same service provider is a lot of times not able to explain with simple and own words is already a grey area. 

Thank you

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Greg Hodges]

I'm not a fan of regulation - especially ineffective regulation.  What we need, perhaps, is more voluntary, effective, accreditation.  Then a client has the choice to seek out an accredited expert, or take a chance.  Is that enough? The bogus-method sellers go direct to the exploration companies with convincing sales pitches. 

I wish I could say that the current "Professional" designation of Geoscientists was effective accreditation.   Maybe it can be, but I have examples of P.Geo QPs writing glowing reviews of clearly-bogus, or completely undefined, geophysical methods on their properties.  The current method of accrediting everyone who passed three or four years of somewhat-related university courses is not enough.   The "P.Geo" I used to have behind my name didn't tell anyone that I forgot everything ever knew about geochemistry.  

"Follow the money".    Can we accept a property report from a PGeo QP with a huge personal financial stake?  They might not be subject experts, but they have a business to promote.  I also have examples where P.Geo, PhD "experts" got financial benefit by promoting bogus methods.   If I publish a paper on the wonders of the GoldGitter, I should have to reveal that GoldGitterInc paid me to write it.

Is there a way to accredit the methods?  Is that enough?  Who has the expertise and authority (and time) to accredit every method for all types of geology?  How much work would it take to show that the PGeo PhD (above) was promoting nonsense? 

Can we properly accredit expertise, and leave it to the Explorers to follow accreditation, or choose their own way. 

 However we accredit, it needs to be open and informed.  Can we do this? Suggestions?

Greg Hodges

[Henry Lyatsky]

Open discussion is key.

Not some academic-style censorship to enforce a dogma (cf. climate alarmism) and not some stifling "license raj."  Free flow of information has been known to be essential to the functioning of a free market since the birth of political economy.

We need lots of publishing without censorship by peer review, and more discussions like this one.  Let's have a cacophonous free-for-all.

Professional associations have been under fire recently for censorship of speech.  I am no Jordan Peterson fan, but his treatment was obscene.  And who can forget all the previous academic abuse of Bjorn Lomborg?  So, let's ignore the wannabe bullies and simply kick stuff around.

In this spirit, I have been pursuing one of my many non-geo interests by writing these articles.  All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, so enjoy.  😁

https://www.visegrad24.com/articles/dragon-and-bear-partners-in-paranoia

https://www.visegrad24.com/articles/the-nixon-doctrine-comes-to-europe

https://www.visegrad24.com/articles/the-guilty-men-how-the-alt-right-harms-conservatism

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Discussions are open. 

In my backyard, I have a mango and a guava tree. Is it freedom of speech to claim that with a dowsing rod made of a mango tree branch I can find cold water, and with another one made of a guava tree branch I can find hot water? Perhaps I can cheat and mislead, and someone will buy my lie? Can we all call that "free market"?

Should I write to the city councillors requesting to remove all traffic lights and stop signs, since regulations are undemocratic? 

Regards

--

[Henry Lyatsky]

Yes, it is free speech to argue any nonsense you want, just like it is free speech for the rest of us to point out that it's sheer nonsense.

Deal with it.

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Free speech? or free cheat? 

It will not take long until the next big scandal in our industry.

[Karen R. Christopherson]

Anybody know anything about this group? 

www.3dge

I can't figure out what they are doing and no explanation I can fund re the science.

Karen R Christopherson, Geophysicist

Chinook Geoconsulting, Inc. 

26961 Hilltop Road

Evergreen CO 80439 USA 

303-674-0252

https://chinook-inc.com

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Who knows. Perhaps another example of “free speech “?  I mean, “free cheat”?

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Greg Hodges]

??

I see reference to 3D Game Engine Programming associated with that name, but nothing specifically related to geo sciences.  I presume their software could be used in geophysics, but to me it just looks like a software tool.  Did I miss something?

Greg Hodges

[Karen R. Christopherson]

This is the company

3D EDGE

3D EDGE

Karen R Christopherson, Geophysicist

Chinook Geoconsulting, Inc. 

26961 Hilltop Road

Evergreen CO 80439 USA 

303-674-0252

https://chinook-inc.com

[Alan Reid]

Looks a lot like MT….?

Alan Reid

Alan B Reid PhD
Reid Geophysics Ltd
7 Keymer House
Michel Grove
Eastbourne BN21 1JZ
UK

Phone: +44 (0) 1323 735520
Mobile: +44 (0) 781 692 4728
Skype Name: alanbarryreid
mailto: al...@reid-geophys.co.uk
web: http://www.reid-geophys.co.uk

<10450.jpg>

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

--

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

--

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

<10450.jpg>

[James Reid]

Hi All,

 

Re 3D EDGE, I found the attached conference abstract via Google.  Like the website, there is no actual technical detail on operating principles and data processing.

I also went right down the rabbit warren and had a look at the Tekton Geometrix website (https://www.tektongeometrix.com/), which does feature a bunch of genuine geophysical instrumentation (mostly seismic/earthquake seismology related) and which mentions accepted methods like gravity, VLF etc.  They are however suspiciously vague when it comes to details of their electromagnetic system.

 

Cheers,

 

James

 

 

Dr James Reid, Director Asia Pacific, Principal Consultant

mirageoscience.com, tel +61.419 748 009, 45 Ventnor Avenue, West Perth WA 6005 Australia

 

From: seg...@aseg.org.au <seg...@aseg.org.au> On Behalf Of Alan Reid
Sent: February 10, 2026 8:45 PM
To: Karen R. Christopherson <chino...@aol.com>
Cc: Alan Reid <al...@reid-geophys.co.uk>; Greg Hodges <hodge...@ymail.com>; seg...@aseg.org.au
Subject: Re: [SEGMIN] 3DGE, was: Worrisome trend with voodoo-geophysical techniques

 

  ATTENTION: Ce courriel provient d’une adresse externe. / This message originated outside Mira Geoscience. 

[Greg Hodges]

Agreed.  " system's triaxial magnetic sensors and biaxial electric sensors", seems normal.   With fancy 3D software, which makes sense.

Looking at the pictures, however, I see a lot of small boxes which are, I presume, the sensors.  I have seen this sort of MT being offered before, with very small, all-in-one H- and E-field sensors. If my impression is right, and those boxes include the E-field sensors, just set on the ground, then (as a client) I would want some assurance from an MT expert that those small, E-field sensors have enough S/N to be effective.  Theoretically possible, but....

Have you asked 3D EDGE?

Greg Hodges

[Greg Hodges]

By the way, I just e-mailed 3D EDGE, through their website, and said: "Are you guys on SEGMIN?  You should be."

Rather than all of us speculating,  let's ask.  Willingness to engage with industry people (and not dodge questions) is the characteristic of good contractors with confidence in their technology.

Greg Hodges

[Kim Frankcombe]

Greg

One of the photo's on their website does show what I'd guess are E wires heading out at right angles.

I'm guessing that the extra pair of black wires on the right is power/solar panel

I'm less concerned about the E's than I am about the bandwidth of the mag sensors which are presumably in the small box but I'm not up to date on that tech and we may be there in which case it should be cheaper and easier to deploy than lugging around 3 broadband coils. The fact that all the MT contractors have not switched suggests to me that we are not there yet and so this is narrow band mag = narrow range of applications. Perhaps even so narrow that the application has not been inverted yet.😉

Cheers
Kim

--

Kim Frankcombe

Senior Consulting Geophysicist

ExploreGeo

PO Box 1191, Wangara, WA 6947 AUSTRALIA

Unit 6,10 O’Connor Way, Wangara, WA 6065, Australia

Phone +61 (0)8 62017719 - if your call goes to voice mail, leave a message. It converts to an email which I'll get where ever I am!

Email k...@exploregeo.com.au

[Kim Frankcombe]

Typo: invented not inverted!

[Chris Wijns]

C0 - PUBLIC

Well according the abstract James sent around, they don’t invert their data either. “… this technology generates high-resolution 3D results enhancing simple interpolation and, thereby, plotting produces self-explaining, high-definition 3D images without the use of traditional modeling methods”. But they do have “good instrument-to-data ratio” and they seem to have “invented” stacking for better S/N.

Chris

 

From: 'Kim Frankcombe' via SEGMIN ASEG <seg...@aseg.org.au>
Sent: Tuesday, 10 February 2026 22:07
To: seg...@aseg.org.au
Subject: Re: [SEGMIN] 3DGE,

 

Typo: invented not inverted!

[Hearst]

They are probably using fluxgate type coils. The S/N will not be there for most of the range with the exception of maybe the upper 1/2 to 3/4 of the AFMAG range. 

Rob

Sent from my BlackBerry — the most secure mobile device — via the Bell Network

From: seg...@aseg.org.au Sent: February 10, 2026 9:06 AM To: seg...@aseg.org.au Reply to: k...@exploregeo.com.au Subject: Re: [SEGMIN] 3DGE,

[Mathieu Landry]

It's a jungle out there and I expect Darwinian mechanics to operate.

Beyond that, I don't think more regulations is the solution. I would rather opt for a network and transparency platform (e.g. Analogous to Wiki/Rotten Tomatoes) This could be spearheaded by an association and promoted at events like PDAC.

[Kim Frankcombe]

Mat

Open websites are great in theory and something we have discussed in the past but as Jeff Beall found with Beall's list of Predatory Journals some of those being commented on are very litigious, or at least threaten to be, and that then requires that the host stand up to that attack and defend it which requires commitment and conviction over an extended period of time. In Beall's case that ultimately wore down his employer. The same thing happens to a lesser degree when Greg comments on Voodoo, Sander's inbox fills up with complaints and legal threats. SEG removed Greg's Voodoo talk from their website for the same reason, shame on them. Fortunately ASEG have a stronger backbone and it can still be found there.

While not without its faults, the medical profession have a facility called the Cochrane Colloquium which puts together a panel of experts to evaluate the efficacy of drugs or other treatments as they are introduced to market, focussing on those that make claims that others find difficult to believe or suspect are false. The process is funded by the medical industry (hospitals, insurers etc) and the panel produce a scientific report which is made public by Cochrane. It is reactive rather than proactive and suspects have to be referred, a panel of suitably qualified and willing experts found and then project funding sought so not all referrals make it to review.

Cheers
Kim

[Greg Hodges]

As Kim noted, it is risky for any individual to make negative public statements about any commercial geophysical system.  The threat of legal action, legitimate or not, is too high.  The Voodoo Seller has millions of dollars at stake, to justify the legal expense.  I have no commercial benefit to protect, so their threat can intimidate me.

I once asked Bob Park, author of the book Voodoo Science, The Road from Foolishness to Fraud, how he could publish negative evaluations of some of the bogus science he described in his book.  He said that the publisher's lawyers went through every sentence with him (and stood by to take his case if he and the publisher were sued).  Anyone who wants to comment negatively, publicly, on any system needs that kind of legal backing.

But who is qualified to do the negative review?  I have seen wondrous baloney promoting a clearly-bogus system authored by a PhD, Professional Geophysicist.  Who should a reader believe?   It can't be left to whoever yells loudest.   The only way to disprove such a claim is with credible science.  Who has the time and funding to do that?  Anonymous reviews of a geophysical method aren't helpful. The Reviewer might be a paid salesperson, or might be a bad-tempered competitor.  Who knows?

And yeah, I believe in Peer-Review of scientific publications.  Done right, it tells the non-expert that "the basic claims in this paper are recognized by the industry at large as valid, and new claims have been proven to the satisfaction of experts".   Sure, there are bad reviewers.  But anyone can publish any codswallop they want without review. 

We need to demand that new-method sellers PROVE, with geophysics, that their system works, and how.  What are the physical fields that it measures, how are they generated by geology, and how do you measure them?  The risk of those sort of questions is why Voodoo sellers avoid the technical people, and go to the non-scientific movers and moneymen to sell their magic.  It's the fault of the moneymen if they do not consult their experts. 

 

It would be nice to have the type of evaluation tools the medical world has, I suppose.   But lets be real: we're trying to minimize financial loss, not save the lives of innocent people desperate for help.  Even so, there are a LOT of bogus cures being sold, especially for the less-than-life-threatening problems.

I don't try to crack the scammers.  I try to educate our industry how to recognize Voodoo geophysics, and try to make our clients aware that there are scammers and bad methods out there, and that they need to use accredited experts to protect their businesses.

And my thanks to the ASEG, other societies who supported my efforts, and people like Kim and a host of others who work together to shine some light in the dark corners.

Greg Hodges

[Henry Lyatsky]

Caveat emptor is what it goes back to.  Ask a lot of questions, use your common sense, do your homework, consult an expert.

Medical malpractice means they literally bury their misdeeds, and the patients lack medical training to see the bad doctoring.  In bad geophysics, the clients are supposedly geo-savvy, and the record of dodgy surveys stays around, which works against the Voodoo types.  Trust your gut: if it feels too good to be true, it probably is.

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[Kim Frankcombe]

Henry

While I don't have a problem with market forces driving the voodoo to the dark corners the real issue is that they are selling themselves as a "geophysical" technique. A technique which the sucker client will eventually see as flawed if not bogus depending on their level of technical understanding - which in some cases is with both feet still on the ground in climbing the ladder of knowledge or at best with one leg in the air about to take the first step. Those who have already climbed beyond a few rungs would not have been taken in. When they realise that they have done their dough its not necessarily the technique they blame it's geophysics they blame and so we all suffer by association. Geochemists have the same (maybe worse) problem.

In short they are doing reputational damage to our profession and that is something we should be concerned about.  In exactly the same way Bri-X damaged investor confidence in Exploration companies, trust in geologists and Indonesia as an investment destination.

However given that the very first issue of Geophysics,  90 years ago, lead with this article by Blau


we haven't done much of a job of raising the image of our profession. 

It might have been better if Blau had published in the other SEG or given that his examples were entirely O&G, in AAPG or something read by geologists rather than geophysicists. How you reach those with two feet still on the ground or yet to approach the ladder, I don't know, maybe talk to Marvel comics or Disney about a thematic issue where the superheroes save the planet from voodoo geophysics and gullible punters? 

Cheers
Kim

[George]

Hi All,

Back in the 70s a fraudster was selling regional magnetic maps made with a fluxgate mag in a dog kennel towed behind a car.  The mining industry guys in Ireland loved it and were buying his maps like hot cakes.  When I tried to point out that the maps were bogus I was mocked and told I was a nihilist and to mind my own business!  An early lesson that has been repeated several times during my 50+ years career, 20 of which were as a client company geophysicist.

 

My observation is that exploration geologists with little or no geophysical knowledge try to keep geophysicists on the sideline so as not to steal their limelight if a discovery is made.  Using expensive and inappropriate techniques or shoddy contractors reduces the chance of a discovery and destroys shareholder value.  That is the message that needs to be conveyed to the investors who will use financial experts to advise them.  They also need geophysical consultants to advise on the best methods to detect the resource being sought.  Caveat emptor is the best form of regulation.

 

And as for voodoo methods, Greg will remember that the Goldspear was listed as such but is in fact a micro-ohmmeter that works by direct contact with gold, sulphide or magnetite particles in the soil, i.e. conduction and not induction.  Advertising this as a “metal detector” was factually correct but led to confusion among the usual adepts.

George Reynolds

[Alan G Jones (Geophysics)]

Can we PLEASE start a new group called "For those who want to argue endlessly with others who hold batshit nonsense ideas about regulation in our industry", and keep this channel clear for the 95% of us who want to discuss mineral exploration using geophysics.

So you know my position, I am on the Geology sub-committee of the Professional Geoscientists Ontario. I'm actually the only geophysicist on that committee, so I do have my work cut out for me...

We either more strongly self-regulate through professional associations, just as many other professions do, or we have regulation imposed on us not on our terms. There have been far too many instances of fraudulent behaviour.

Alan

-- 
Alan G. Jones, P.Geo., MRIA, Fellow AGU
Ottawa, Canada

Senior Professor Emeritus
Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, Ireland

Specially-Appointed Professor
China University of Geosciences Beijing, China

President, ManoTick GeoSolutions Ltd.
www.manotick-geosolutions.com/

Google scholar: https://scholar.google.ca/citations?user=fbT-K4MAAAAJ
Publons: https://publons.com/researcher/2876587/alan-g-jones/
ORCID ID: 0000-0002-3482-2518
SCOPUS ID: 7407105442
Web of Science ResearcherID: A-3241-2009

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

When people immigrate to Canada or Australia, they need a visa, right? That is called regulation. 

When people want to have a heart surgery, they want to be operated by a certified surgeon, right? That is called regulation. Or do they prefer a doctor who completed medical training at Tik-Tok university as many during the pandemic?

When people want to build a house in earthquake-prone areas, they want to contract a civil engineer who follows the corresponding building code, right? That is called regulation.

Why should geoscience and mineral exploration be different? Do we want instead a license to cheat? Why are so many afraid of those regulations arguing “free speech”? 

I know of people who have offered to African countries, with full impunity, the calculation of mineral reserves from country-wide regional airborne geophysical data, so that their government can offer bonds in international financial markets. Same people have offered the calculation of the GDP by using the same geophysical data. Shameful? Yes, shameful. But “long live the free speech”.

Do we want another Bre-X? Apparently yes. It might not take long until the next big scandal in the industry.

Regards 

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Henry Lyatsky]

1.  Someone asked me about 15 years ago about a promo for airborne surveys to locate oil accumulations.  If memory serves (I haven't thought about it much since), it was flown in a 737 at a 12,000' or so altitude, using some very ill-described proprietary tech.  I suggested ways for a client to research such things.

2.  I was once asked to run for the APEGA board, council, whatever.  I said hard pass.

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[Rolf N Pedersen]

Hi Henry,

I think this is what you are referring to:

  The "French oil finder from high elevation" refers to the "Avions Renifleurs" (Sniffer Planes) hoax, a major fraud in the late 1970s and early 1980s involving the French state-owned oil company Elf Aquitaine

Rolf

BYW.  We'll have to keep our brains engaged at the upcoming PDAC.

[Henry Lyatsky]

Here's the story.  It's so stupid it's funny.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Oil_Sniffer_Hoax

Henry Lyatsky
* confidential

[Mathieu Landry]

There will always be a degree of parasites in any goal seeking system where agents can exploit degrees of freedom.

@Kim: fair point about retribution but I think there are ways to structure such a platform to be relatively immune. It can't be an individual pet project and of course lawyers need to be involved. There is a car review show I like where the analysts are objective, thorough and rigorous using a systematic approach. The outcome is simple : recommended, in evaluation, or not recommended. Tough to sue a fair and honest system.

@Alan: I share your annoyance with the topic running in circle but regulation of geophysics is a hot and relevant topic. Perhaps the discussion should be taken off Segmin in a live forum with the aim of drafting a report and recommendations?

@Sergio: a minimum standard of regulation (like a driver's license say) is desirable and in fact already exists in many jurisdictions. One issue is the lack of universality even if the laws of physics are the same around the planet. This patchwork of red tape doesn't help the cause ultimately ; I think the whole needs to mature to the level of integration of passports. Furthermore, there is already a regulatory framework to disclose resources to the market (NI43101 or JORC).

cheers, M 

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Alan Jones, do you think P.Geo, AusIMM, EurGeol, and Pr.Sci.Nat regulators can get together and launch an international standard?

Something must happen. Otherwise, in some years the novel “Chronicle of a Fraud Announced” will be written, and our profession will experience its “One hundred years of solitude”. At least, we might get a collective Nobel Prize in literature :)

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Alan G Jones (Geophysics)]

Nope, We cannot even get our act together across all Canadian Provinces in terms of acceptance of accreditation, and until we do that we have no credibility trying to have international standards that others must adhere to.

One thing that is happening in Canada is that the geology course requirements have been enhanced in the Knowledge requirement. Many of us geophysicists who are P.Geo. probably wouldn't get it today.

I find it ironic that we are accredited P.Geo., as in Professions Geoscientists, but the strong and increasing bias is very much towards geology. In comparison, geologists don't need to have taken any geophysics courses to become P.Geo. 

See the requirements here (page 4 onwards): https://www.pgo.ca/files/geoscience-knowledge-experience-requirements.pdf

As a result of this unfairness to geophysicists, I am going to demand the first ever FIFA Award in Geophysics. And if I don't get it I will ban geophysics in Canada and refuse to host the World Geophysical Games being held here.

Alan

On 2026-02-15 15:36, S E Geoscience and Exploration wrote:

Alan Jones, do you think P.Geo, AusIMM, EurGeol, and Pr.Sci.Nat regulators can get together and launch an international standard?

Something must happen. Otherwise, in some years the novel “Chronicle of a Fraud Announced” will be written, and our profession will experience its “One hundred years of solitude”. At least, we might get a collective Nobel Prize in literature :)

Sergio Espinosa, Ph.D., P.Geo

Director, Geophysics

S E Geoscience & Exploration

[Kim Frankcombe]

At the risk of dragging this out I'll attempt to offer a stop by summarising and presenting my view of the solution.

As Greg has pointed out, several times, regulation only impacts on those who submit to being regulated and the dodgy operators do not. Just as surveillance cameras do not stop crime, regulation alone will not stop dodgy operators if they choose to operate in blind spots. Surveillance cameras greatest strength is in solving crime rather than preventing it. Regulation's greatest threat is the punishment those who sign up to it receive, if they fail to live up to standards. When was the last time someone was barred from operating in Canada? In Oz (which has a Country wide Professional Geo system and which is much less tick box than what the Canadian system appears to be and which is not required to operate as a geoscientist only to report to the stock exchange) the last revocation of membership and thus their ability to effectively operate as a consultant, was ~3 years ago and for a serial offender. 

Regulation is a part of the story and sensible regulation is welcome, a tick box style which appears to be the norm in Canada will have little impact other than reducing competition and ensuring that some of the world's most experienced geoscientists can't operate effectively there. Not really a win for consumers. Looking at the Geoscience knowledge matrix in Alan's link I could not pass as 50 years ago they were not part of a university offering - statistics was only taught as part of a psychology degree in the Arts department, scientists and engineers studied maths. We didn't study computer programming we were supposed to use our solid science background to just do it and we did exactly that. 

Nothing will stop dodgy operators but provision of accessible, accurate, unbiased information is likely to have more impact than other tools. While Mathieu is right that if the information is accurate, fair and unbiased it is hard to sue, as others here know, that does not stop the dodgy operators from trying and that can be costly and exhausting.

For new or upcoming graduates, incorporation of a scam spotting unit in their course as Sue has done in Sth Africa would be a good start. Although, in my view, universities already teach too little basic science and too much of the soft skills subjects - they are responding to demand but demand that I believe is misplaced.

Chris (offline) suggested scam awareness talks at venues like PDAC which if done well, could be a great contribution. Joining forces with the geochemists to present at geological events should over time help the consumers identify the dark areas away from the CCTV and know they have to walk carefully. Getting the topic balance right for such a talk will be critical, it needs to be provocative to attract and audience but not enable the ordinary legal punter to identify anyone in particular. Using examples from the past where the operators are no longer in business might we one route - in many cases the same basic concepts are being re-used just with new buzz words - AI, resonance, declassified military technology - noting that the last two apply very much to the development of magnetometers and so by themselves are not necessarily a warning flag. Using the Avion Renifleurs example as a case study might also be a start  although it relied in a large part on a well connected underground "boys club" network for its success. However it still had most of the tell tale signs one needs to look for.

Cheers
Kim

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to segmin+un...@aseg.org.au.

[Greg Hodges]

I agree with Kim that one of the best things you can do is give talks to geologists about "The Dark Side of Geophysics" (my title) or "False Signals" (Sue Webb's title) or whatever you choose to call bogus geophysics. Articles in geoscience journals and newsmagazines is another medium to get the message out. We need to teach the geologists and other exploration-business people to be skeptical and consult with us experts.  Talk to the regulators and the business conferences, too.  Bonus: it's potentially business development, too.

I am very happy to help anyone who wants to give such a talk. I have plenty of material, plenty of examples not-attributable to any scammer, and some examples of bogus methods that have been exposed through courts or the media that we can talk about.  

Greg Hodges

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Not long ago, The Government of Canada had a roadshow in Europe called "Invest in Canada". During a stop in a major European capital city, a known geophysical contractor was invited to present and take part of the discussion panel. 

The person who represented this geophysical company, without having any training, experience, or any other credentials in geological sciences or in mineral exploration, stated (wordly) "that the company with its specialized geophysical technology (meant was Grav & EM) was able to map and assess critical mineral reserves with precision". A very misleading statement given within the walls of a Canadian diplomatic representation. Those words sounded like a magic wand or perhaps like a magic sword. 

If we are note careful, we will soon have another fraud and scandal.

[Greg Hodges]

Sergio: 

Are you telling us that a government-run, politically-driven sales pitch didn't stick strictly to exact geophysical science, but maybe over-promoted what they can do?  Are you surprised at that? 

Greg Hodges

[S E Geoscience and Exploration]

Well, I hope the embassy of Krakozhia invites me to a panel discussion where I can explain how the branches of my mango tree can find hot water, and how those of my guava tree can find cold water.

[k...@condorconsult.com]

All

 

As the ‘science’ part of the discussion appears to have been exhausted, I will ask that simple chit chat be relegated to the parties directly involved.

 

Ken

[Robert Ellis]

Thanks Ken

Long overdue!

Bob

Robert B. Ellis (EGC)
9528 Xanthos Lane
Reno, NV 89521 USA
775-338-2211 (cell)

bell...@gmail.com

[Dennis Woods]

Yes!  Can we please bring this discussion to an end (Sergio).  I'm getting tired of delete, delete, delete, delete, delete, delete ....  Not what SEGMIN was designed for.

Dennis

---

From: seg...@aseg.org.au <seg...@aseg.org.au> on behalf of Robert Ellis <bell...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 9:43 AM
To: k...@condorconsult.com <k...@condorconsult.com>
Cc: S E Geoscience and Exploration <se.geoscience....@gmail.com>; Greg Hodges <hodge...@ymail.com>; seg...@aseg.org.au <seg...@aseg.org.au>

Subject: Re: [SEGMIN] Worrisome trend with voodoo-geophysical techniques

You don't often get email from bell...@gmail.com. Learn why this is important