[meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)

From: Meteoriteshow <meteoriteshow_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Sat May 6 05:53:24 2006
Message-ID: <008601c670f2$e84c7840$0400a8c0_at_IBM>

Dear Adam and All,

I mostly agree with you Adam but would place this concern in another way.

NWAs do not have any coordinate of the place where they were found and even when studied by scientists, another piece of the same
meteorite can only be "likely paired" but this expression should be used ONLY by a "qualified Nom Com approved facility" and not by
dealers themselves. As a matter of fact, analyses of a meteorite can provide results that are quite similar to another meteorite's
study but without coordinates one can never be 100% sure that both are paired.

When I say that I "mostly" agree with you Adam, I mean that I do not place this problem on a pure commercial point of view but
simply on the Nom Com's rules point of view. When a NWA is registered with a number, it is as you say linked to a TKW and one cannot
add by him/herself some weight to this TKW. As I said, even scientists cannot most of the time, as they cannot prove when more mass
comes that it is paired to a previously classified NWA. Therefore the rule is -as you mentioned Adam- to provide another NWA number
to the new mass, eventually stating that it is "likeley paired" to another NWA when analyse tends to say so.

The only case when additional masses can be added to a previously classified meteorite is when the place of find is very well known,
like Brenham for instance. Steve Arnold is hunting on the Brenham strewnfield and his wonderful finds are definitely additional
masses to Brenham meteorite. Both analyses and place of find prove this fact.

Therefore I do not consider that a classification is the "commercial property" of someone who asked and eventually paid for it, but
there are rules that were made by the Meteoritical Society and every meteorite hunter or dealer MUST follow those rules.

Just my 2 cents!
Kind regards,

Frederic Beroud
http://www.meteoriteshow.com
IMCA member # 2491 (http://www.imca.cc/)

----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Hupe" <raremeteorites_at_comcast.net>
To: <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Sent: Friday, May 05, 2006 8:41 PM
Subject: [meteorite-list] Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI)


> Dear List Members,
>
> Here are some of my thoughts on Self Proclaimed Pairings Issues (SPPI).
>
> I feel this subject needs to be breached again as a few have not caught on
> to how destructive and lowly this practice is.
>
> Saying something is "likely paired" is the same as saying "I am too cheap or
> lazy to have my material studied by a qualified Nom Com approved facility."
>
> Using notes provided for official meteorites to describe unofficial material
> is the same as stealing as far as I am concerned. Why should dealers who
> spend upwards of thousands per month having their material officially
> classified and getting their very own nomenclature allow others to violate
> this information? I know ebay will enforce number borrowing issues as they
> have been trained that although nobody owns these numbers they are treated
> the same as serial numbers. These serial numbers only apply to a certain
> amount of material and to borrow them is fraudulent. Some more news; ebay
> treats all product descriptions as proprietary data and will shut down
> auctions immediately if descriptions are borrowed and then reported.
>
> Even if somebody who deals meteorites is 99% sure their material is paired
> to somebody else's they should still follow the correct protocol, have their
> material made official and receive their very own number. The only
> meteorites excluded by this rule are from rare falls as stated by the
> Meteoritical Society. NWA 869 is an exception in that multiple type
> specimens from multiple dealers were submitted so all that contributed can
> share this number, a rare case. The I.M.C.A. stated that they stand behind
> the Meteoritical Society rules and so should members who belong to this
> organization that stands for "Authenticity" above all else. How can a
> dealer claim his material is authentic when no qualified laboratory has even
> looked at it?
>
> Collectors are entitled to official material or at the very least
> provisional if the rules are being adhered to. The rules have been
> stiffened up considerably on provisional numbers because only after a type
> specimen has been submitted to a Nom Com approved depository and studied
> will a provisional number be assigned. The market has moved a long way in
> the last year and a half with more than 95% compliance to these rules. It
> makes good sense 20 years down the road when others take over these
> collections or they are passed down to family members that they can say with
> confidence what they have. Terms like a Moroccan stating "these are that"
> or a dealer saying, "likely paired" or "in my opinion" won't fly because
> unstudied material has very little scientific or intrinsic value in my
> opinion. A few years ago, many unknowingly violated these rules because
> they were unclear. I was partially guilty of the same thing a few years
> back but have since reapplied and received new numbers for anything we
> brought out and noted this in my descriptions. The rules have been clear
> for the last two years and to continually violate them will only serve to
> undermine collector confidence.
>
> Enough from me,
> Regards,
>
> ------------------------------------
> Adam Hupe
> The Hupe Collection
> Team LunarRock
> IMCA 2185
> raremeteorites_at_comcast.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Sat 06 May 2006 05:53:20 AM PDT