In a recent paper Cornell and Schiitte (1995) suggest that the Kalahari manganese field (KMF) is of volcanogenic-exhalative origin with the manganese directly derived from the underlying Ongeluk lavas. They state in their final paragraph that this new model is to supersede the existing sedimentary models for the deposit proposed for example by Beukes (1983). However, the model proposed by Cornell and Schfitte (1995) is unacceptable because it does not take into account any of the established fundamental geological features such as stratigraphy, sedimentology, petrography, mineral paragenesis, regional geology, structural geology, and hydrothermal alteration of the manganese ores. The model of Cotnell and Schiitte (1995) is based purely on chemical analyses of samples for which the geological setting is not indicated at all. It is also based on some misconceptions regarding the geology and mineralogy of the manganese ores of the KMF in particular, and manganese deposition in general. They also provide no objective geological evidence to prove that their so-called 'Kalahari alteration" of the Ongeluk lava is syngenetic with the formation of the overlying iron-formations and manganese ores. In fact, they totally disregard the presence of iron-formations which are interbedded with the manganese ore beds.