[meteorite-list] Meteorite Collecting Ban

From: Adam Hupe <adamhupe_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu Apr 22 10:16:31 2004
Message-ID: <03d601c35ec8$d644a940$b4dbe60c_at_attbi.com>

Dear Eric and List,

I agree, to number each find from Antarctica heavily skews the results. If
every one of the Tazas we have gone through each received a number it would
number into the thousands, same for Bensour, same for NWA 869. We have over
8,000 individual meteorites, not fragments from Northwest Africa, mostly
ordinary chondrites that sit in storage because we cannot find a lab
interested in studying them. Using the 3.5:1 ratio would mean we have over
2,285 different finds, a ridiculous number. I feel all of these stones
might represent only about 90 falls at the very most, a 25:1 ratio. We have
been donating these stones on a regular basis to observatories and schools
for hand specimens, at least they are not thrown in a box and forgotten
about. I think ratios are very misleading when comparing desert finds to
Antarctic finds.

All the Best,

Adam Hupe




----- Original Message -----
From: <Starbits_at_aol.com>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 2:53 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Meteorite Collecting Ban


> In a message dated 8/8/2003 12:25:16 PM US Mountain Standard Time,
> jgrossman_at_usgs.gov writes:
>
> << You are right; it is hard to compare the statistics.>
>
> I had waited to reply hoping for additional statistics from Bernd (I don't
> envy you the updating task), but here goes. I have rearranged parts of
Jeff's
> email to make it easier for me to answer. If I have taken anything out
of
> context I apologize in
> advance.
>
> <But let's face it... you can't
> get even close to statements that were made indicating that 95% of new
> meteorites are commercially collected ones.>
>
> I agree completely. However this comment line was started in response to
> comments supporting a collecting ban by individuals who believe the
> collector/dealer/hunter's contributions are insignificant and completely
> irrelevant to scientific endevors. That isn't supported by the
statistics
> either.
>
> <As for rare meteorites, which I will define as non-ordinary-chondrites,
> there are 1550 from Antarctica and 467 from commercial collections.>
>
> Let's refine the numbers a bit. Pretty much the start of hot desert
> collecting
> was in 1998. Of the numbers you quote above how many are since the start
> of 1998? Do the same pairing numbers Lindstrom estimated apply to the
> non-ordinary-chondrites? I don't have access to a database so Jeff if you
> could let us know I would appreciate it.
>
> <Meteorites that formed strewn fields get just as many
> numbers in the Sahara as in Antarctica (one per specimen).>
>
> I was under the impression that each specimen gets a separate designation
> in antarctica. If there was a witnessed fall in Antarctica such as
bensour
> in Africa would it get a single name and entry in the catalog listing or
would
> each stone found get a separate designation and entry?
>
>
>
> I can't make that estimate. That is one of the reasons that I asked
about
> the total
> mass of Antarctic meteorites. Statistically it would be reasonable to
> assume the
> ratio of OCs to other meteorite types would be similar. Certainly
> differences in weathering will affect the numbers some, but in gross
approximation they
> should
> be somewhat similar. If there is 10 or 100 times as much mass coming out
of
> the hot desert there should be 10 or 100 times the rare stuff, or at least
2
> to 20 times. High mass strewn fields certainly could affect the
statistics
> however neither region has many iron meteorites which would be most likely
> to affect the approximation. Stony falls aren't big enough that one fall
> should
> affect the gross approximation that much.
>
> Eric Olson
> http://www.star-bits.com
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://www.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Sat 09 Aug 2003 06:51:56 PM PDT