[meteorite-list] New Campo -Myth Busted?

From: dean bessey <deanbessey_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Tue Aug 24 14:15:20 2004
Message-ID: <20040824181517.67142.qmail_at_web12305.mail.yahoo.com>

I wouldent trust some "Unknown annoyonamous" source.
Lets see that stand up in court or argue it at
It is pretty easy to read a law and pretty easy to get
a copy of any law in argentina (Just ask the embassy).
You might need somebody to translate it to english but
anybody who is making a blind statement of fact and
being to pussy scared into mentioning their names
sounds to me more likely sombody trying to privately
scare you away from looking over their strewnfield.
Sort of reminds me of Keith Littleton's rant last June
on this list where he went to some serious
archaeologists and deliberately misrepresented one of
Mark Bostics auctions of Libyan Desert Glass as some
ancient egyptian artifact and then from the responce
concerning ancient artifacts declared that it was
illegal to export unworked pieces of libyan desert
It makes no sense to me why somebody without any
ulterior motive would make the declarations that they
made to Adam and then request that they remain
annonamous. If you contact the embassy they wont tell
you to "Not tell anybody that you got this copy of
argentnian laws from us".
There was a new world wide law passed lately. Only the
pellisons are permitted to deal in meteorites.
Everybody else by decree are not allowed to deal in
The pellisons have told everybody this but we are not
sure what authority issued it. Seems only the
pellisons know.
These "annonumous" sources have about as much
credibility as keith and the Pellisons rants over the
past few years.
Maybe its just me. But somehow it just seems odd to me
that an intelligent and sane person and serious
meteorite hunter would plan trips around some
annonomous individual sending them an email saying
that something is illegal so stay away rather than
making a quick phone call to the countries embassy. I
have a friend who is trying to get twenty two million
dollars out of Nigeria. I know this to be true because
he contacted me out of the blue via email from some
internet cafe last night. Maybe I should put him in
touch with any list member interested in helping him
out. Just dont call the nigerian embassy to find out
the exact law concerning this activity.


--- Adam Hupe <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net> wrote:

> Dear List,
> I would like to thank those who responded to my
> inquiry about old versus new
> Campos. I am looking to explore new areas and
> thought this locality might
> have been worth investigating but have since changed
> my mind. Below are a
> set of responses that best address this issue. The
> authors would like to
> remain anonymous so I left their names out.
> ***********************************************
> Email #1
> Your "well informed source" is correct on both
> counts. Illegal exportation
> and there are no mountainside finds. The terrain is
> basically flat and the
> strewn field is shorter and wider than presented in
> Cassiday's various
> papers. The reports of a specimen recovery 70-80 km
> down-range are repeated,
> but have never been evidenced. The difference
> between 'new' and 'old' Campos
> is the depth of recovery. Cassiday's specimens
> recovered 1962-73 are both
> 'new' and 'old'. Recovered at depth within the
> craters are 'new'; those
> recovered from surface ejecta or from farmers'
> fields are 'old'. Repeated
> irrigation and the use of fertilizers has taken its
> toll. Cassiday used a
> WW2 metal detector in his search. With the
> increasing demand by collectors -
> beginning about 1989 - much more powerful detectors
> are being used in
> recovery; the deeper recoveries being more stable.
> Not all of the 'new'
> specimens are stable as some specimens continue to
> be found at shallow
> depths. The extremely flat surface of the region is
> subject to sheet
> deposition 1-2 cm/100 yr (think Kansas). Runoff is
> limited to shallow
> depressions and occasional shallow channels; the
> slopes of which might be
> miss translated as mountain-sides.
> The pre-entry meteoroid is estimated to be ~ 3 m in
> diameter and masses ~
> 840,000 kg (Lieberman, et al., in MAPS Feb 2002) and
> suggests that many more
> specimens will be smuggled out in the coming years.
> Other than the variously published photos by Cassidy
> et, al. I was only able
> to locate photos of the "Haag" specimen. Its
> recovery down-range is
> consistent with aerial break-up scenarios and is
> probably the Campo del
> Cielo main mass.
> ****************************************************
> Another Note:
> The place where the "New Campos" are found is the
> same that the one of the
> "Old Campos". The difference is the "old" are near
> the surface, so them
> intensely undergone the effects of the
> meteorization, mainly the humidity.
> The "new" are deeper so that them could conserve its
> regmagliptes and have a
> greater stability. The "New Campos" began to appear
> when the zone was
> released with powerful metal detectors. Previously
> the especímentes were
> found on the surface or raised when the fields were
> plowed.
> The Campo del Cielo strewn field has 45km by 15km.
> But it has an area of
> approximately 1500 hectares where the greater
> concentration is verified.
> Many authors affirm that the strewn field reaches 80
> km, because stories
> exist on the denominated "Mesón de Fierro", probably
> situated 70 km to the
> NE of the main site. But until today it was not
> verified.
> I hope you found this information to be as
> interesting as I did,
> Adam
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com

Do you Yahoo!?
Win 1 of 4,000 free domain names from Yahoo! Enter now.
Received on Tue 24 Aug 2004 02:15:17 PM PDT

Help support this free mailing list:

Yahoo MyWeb